tv BOS Rules Committee 12116 SFGTV January 21, 2016 10:00pm-2:01am PST
>>[gavel] >> i would like to thank sfgtv staff for their service broadcasting today's meeting. phil jackson and jen hello, thank you for your service. just a little housekeeping right now before we start. we are going to have items to and three first. they shouldn't take too long. the charter of moments we have already heard in committee a couple times already. so there's not a lot of discussion. mostly making amendment and moving forward to the next meeting. probably some public comment but they should not take long. at the most i think 20 min. will get you through those items and the entire rest meeting on item number one on the alternative use of force. then, i want to
make sure people are aware public comment will be 2 min. that will be a time limit on public comment. mr. clark if you can call item number to speak to >> item number two is charter of the san francisco to acquire an appropriation for the parks and recreation open-space fund based on city spending for park and recreation purposes fiscal year 2015-2016 and modifying the recreation and park department banning obligations to include equity analysis at an election to be held on june 7, 2016 >> before supervisor farrell get started i just want to say i've been working with him on this measure and i've actually from beginning when he introduced it i put my name not yet as a cosponsor but i want to make sure he had a pretty thorough process what they needed in this measure in amending in a way that the need
to meet the needs across the circuit i think this issue was around equity and make sure there were measures in place that would give some accountability around equity and the parks and recreation the board of supervisors for approval. i know this was not the steps that a lot of people who were working urgently on this measure were hoping to do, but i do feel this actually broadens the appreciation of the measure and i do appreciate the flexibility and accepting these amendment especially supervisor mark farrell. >> thank you. so i'll keep my comments on the overall measure since we talked about quite a bit, i'm introducing three amendment today. i want to thank supervisor avalos for working together with this amendment to making this as
tight as possible. i think it's a testament to his leadership as well. i want my colleagues and my cosponsors as well for part of this and being part of the conversation as well as everyone involved in making the amendment and working on them together. so, there are three sets of amendments to the first amendment the annual set aside on a baseline for 15 years. we talked about that topic for quite a while. i will guarantee significant funding for the department in year 16-30 going forward compared to what we had before. the second set of amendment built on the equity limits we made at the last committee hearing and premise made to the department include strategies to mitigate deficiencies in the last set of amendment is to give additional oversight required [inaudible]. from my perspective these amendment represent over 15 amendment since introduction in the fall. i want to thank
everyone who's been involved in this. sincerely a road but i do think we're in a good place right now. it certainly look forward to bringing in front of the voters. so colleagues, will open up to public comment. i certainly appreciate accepting these amendment ticket underwear to sit before we take it out of committee next week. but again i want to thank everyone involved supervisor avalos over the past few weeks. >> thank you. i think we can open this item for republican member if you like to comment, more or less the order i read your names and anyone after that can come forward as well. [calling names]. >> good morning. i then before you but how many times and i do want to reiterate what i've said before. at this point i want to thank you for keeping
your eyes on the big prize and for the improvements made to this legislation. they do very much and let's go forward. >> thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. matt o'grady. i want to echo phil's comments before me. little over two years ago the parks alliance adopted a really big strategic goal which is by 2020, we want to see the city put into place adequate and sustainable funding for our entire park system throughout san francisco. the charter amendment including the memories you have proposed supervisor avalos, strengthens this overall measure and gets us a very long way towards achieving that goal. so we very strongly support this. we appreciate the animal amendment and the particularly the longer time frame of the extension of the open-space fund and the baseline that provides a much more stable long-term view for
that apartment. so were very supportive of the amendment. i want to call out, can supervisor be farrell for his leadership in this effort throughout and all the supervisors signed on as cosponsors for the contributions in making it happen. >> thank you very much. >> good morning supervise. kelly-i want to add the thank you for all your hard work. mr. farrell mentioned 15 amendment to get all four of you have been key in bringing this. we appreciate you helping san francisco parks. >> commissioner norton, welcome >> thank you. good morning. i want to add my thanks to my colleagues to the parks alliance. i spoke to all of you for all the work you've done. we feel good about it. we think that this is going to provide real flexibility for that
apartment going forward and the extension of the open-space fund, thank you supervisors for finding a way to make that happen. it's going to add to that stability. so were pleased and looking forward to getting it on about and running a strong campaign. >> thank you. before the next speaker i've to other cards. [calling names]. >> thank you very much. my name is rosemary came and get him on the board of san francisco parks alliance and one last time, i would like to thank supervisor farrell or is it incredible leadership in getting this charter amendment moving forward. we are extremely pleased with it as it is now finally being recommended. we also want to say how much we appreciate all the work that went into getting to this final proposal, including supervisor avalos is leadership in extending the
open-space fund, which is a truly wonderful addition to the major. so, thank you all very much. we look forward to getting this out of the rules committee, finally, and onto the board of supervisors agenda and then onto the ballot in june. thank you, get >> thank you very much. and the other members of the public like to comment? >> on todd david good i'm wearing my residence town square have. i just want to say the extension of the open-space fund is outstanding for all the communities out there that need open-space. so, i think we've done a good job of starting to tackle open space deficient areas and by extending it were going to tackle even more of those open space deficient areas. so, i love the extension to make sure we'll have the money for the communities that need the open space. so thank you very much. >> thank you. any other member of the public seeing none, will public comment is
closed. >>[gavel] >> this item is a lie before us. supervisors he felt less government >> i want to thank everyone involved. thank for all the public comment. and most of all my colleagues. it's been a solid effort together and i think when a good place. i look forward to moving this for. >> great. so doing the motion to accept the amendment? >> moved and seconded. >> would think that without objection. >>[gavel] >> we can move this automatically to the next was committee meeting. do we need a motion on that >> yes. if we can get a date certain >> on motion we move into next thursday if we can get a date certain >> on motion we move into next thursday, january 28. >> moved and seconded. >>[gavel] our next item please >> item number three, second draft of the charter amendment
of the city and county of san francisco to require that upon a letter told a special legend is a vacancy in the office of the mayor member of the board of supervisors was originally scheduled election be held within 180 days of the vacancy provided the present of the board of supervisors is an acting mayor until an election is held to fill the mayoral vacancy and provide the mayor shall appoint an interim supervisor to fill the supervisor will vacancy with the interim supervisor being ineligible to complete in that election at an election to be held on june 7, 2016 >> this is a much i bought four. briefly, i want other amendment which i like to make today. and then move this item to next weeks was committee meeting to be heard. the amendment i'm making is actually two make this charter amendments excludes about filling vacancies on the board of supervisors. we will keep or amending this to keep the
existing process we have for filling the vacancy in the mayor's office. that would lead to a board vote to set in place an interim mayor. piteously, we were to run this measure as it is. you would have the board president acting as the acting mayor and board president but i don't think it makes a lot of sense. really, what my intention around this was to have some chance to consider different options because there's lots of ways we could grab this measure. it's never going to be exactly perfect. but to me more than anything in make some sense to have a process and separation between the executive branch and the legislative branch, and have us be able to elect the people who are going to be doing cpr on the board of supervisors rather than having them appointed, which to me is about our democratic process. so, i will
make a motion to see we can accept the amendment and then move this item to next agenda. first, what public comment. any member of the public comment would like to comment on this measure please come forward. >> my name is-i do not quite understand john avalos about the mayor but am concerned about our current mayor was there to fill a vacancy and promised he would not run and then did run. i think someone in a position that can be manipulated by money influences, which i believe is what happens. it means we got a mayor that was promised he would not do it and started out with a lie about becoming a mayor in the first place. i find it very disturbing. so,
maybe you could explain more exactly how the mayor part is because i do not get that. thank you very much >> any other member of the public comment like to comment seeing none, we will close public comment is closed >>[gavel] >> i appreciate the question. actually, i don't recall when i voted for edwards lee for interim mayor in january of 2011 that are requested that he make a promise not to run for may. was in a condition that i thought was in place. i think you need that to some members of the board of supervisors, but it didn't seem to be a condition for us voting for him in part of our vote. so, to me it really wasn't about that. the changes we are making, the current process right now, the way we have it in place, but as a vacancy in the mayor's office, the president of the board would serve as acting mayor until the board of supervisors were to select or vote do have a mayor elected.
so, that process happened when mayor gavin newsom was elected to become lieutenant governor and he wasn't sworn in until around january 10 or so of 2011 good news a little bit of a gap between-well a month and a half that we knew he was guilty leaving office and we had the actual boat and interim mayor in place. the board of supervisors elected an interim mayor. in that time, there was a lot of process we went through to determine how these vote would happen. we had not had a process put forth to us in decades. so we actually create a process for how that vote would go for. it was actually a board process showed us that in order to follow our charter, to extended out into
the vote if any member of the board of supervisors was going to get elected without the required eight loads but you cannot vote for yourself to become elected interim mayor. so, we actually went on through another process where we just need to find someone outside the board to become a mayor about a month or about a month was spent looking at different candidates for mayor that we finally made the vote around january 4 of 2011. we actually didn't get to an actual vote are generally forth but postponed it for a couple days. to me, that process seems a bit tainted by the process that we were electing someone who actually wasn't in the country, who had indicated to every member of the board he was interested in becoming mayor of san francisco. that to me was a false in our process. not that the mayor had made a condition that he was going to not run for mayor. he was elected interim mayor. so, i want to go back. i feel that process is fine, to go back to having a
person who is acting mayor and mayor at the same time or and board president at the same time . i don't think it really is good for that person or good for the city to have that person in the legislative branch and executive branch of that object that's a very thorough response to your question. i appreciate the question. so, i'm going to motion that we accept the amendment is such good essentially, were taken out references to the selection process for the interim mayor, and moving forward, exclusively with having the board vacancies filled by a person who the mayor will appoint as an interim supervisor will not be eligible to run, it will be turned out once election is certified and will move forward instead with an election that would be in the voter's hands to fill this vacancy on the board of supervisors.
>> to the chair, i made a number of comments last week. i'm not going to stay cozier no sure will continue those discussion but today's purposes all make a motion to amend your charter amendment incentive for to the next was committee meeting. >> i generate 28 >> on january 20 >> will take that without objection. >>[gavel] >> okay. please item number one >> item number one hearing alternatives to use of force in policing and reevaluating san francisco please the government general orders 2.07, 5101 and 5.02 and requesting the police department to report. >> supervisor cohen >> good morning everyone. thank you for being here during this important conversation. first, i want to start the hearing off them with a moment
of silence as we begin to remember those and acknowledge those not here with us today. deeply those lost to violence. >>[moment of silence] >> thank you. i also want to take a moment to express condolences but just to the mother of when the woods of every mother that could hear my voice is lost a child. i can only imagine in my heart aches for your unimaginable loss. but there are some key things i want this conversation to focus on. one of which is the policies that we have in place when it comes to officer involved shooting and it use of force. since 27 there've been 37 officer involved shootings in san francisco and each of them have been deemed justified. after investigation by local investigating agency. i noticed this a very difficult piece of information to accept without being questioned. which is why we are here today. the use of excessive force against the mentally ill african americans
and other minority communities is actually not a new issue. the difference now is that we have readily available technology that are capturing irrefutable data and evidence to bring voice to many of the folks that claim to be victims. that's why we are here. not only to disclose i did not only to discuss the police department's use of force policy, which to date has not been revised since 1995, but also begin to open the conversation of a transparent discussion about policy and more partly because of changes that need to happen across this entire country and how we begin to bring some of that change right here in our own department. i'm interested in proven best practices we began to blend the tools here. it's clear the vast majority of the people across the entire country
that seen the unfortunate as well as incredibly graphic video of the shooting of mr. woods, that there is some non-legal technical method of able to subdue folks when the situation arises. i believe we need to begin to hold ourselves accountable for our successes as well as certainly are failures and leaving this case we failed our residents and we failed mario revealed mrs. woods we responsibly to fix a broken and failed system. if were going to change what broken we got to come together and identify and address and i know that's a difficult realization for many people that have been on the front line protecting and serving. there is certainly a crisis in confidence. we talked about it all the time. that's what brought us here to the chamber today. eight crisis in
confidence in law-enforcement in the entire country not specifically here in san francisco but today talking about here in the city. were not exempt from this deficit and lack of confidence and trust. an overwhelming majority of our officers are very hard-working men and women that do put their lives online every day to protect our streets. many of these courageous people want better tools to use when encountering someone that they want-when encountering someone as well as looking to better training to be able to deal with the high-intensity situations that people are facing every single day. a real-time example is we had a shooting a few days ago at third at the side of and we now have the shooter in custody. i use that as an example as good policing. that is working but in san francisco we have a number of progressive policies, police policies, that are already in place in hopes of
improving a police strategy, but there's certainly room for growth and improvement in looking to continue to work together with the community lawmakers as well as law enforcement. so that we can continue to see more change at a faster rate. there are several folks here that are joining us today that of opening remarks. i want to read my supervisor avalos are going to offer a few remarks. we have some presentations that were going to be making today of experts that are both within the police department and also outside of the police department. with that, i like to invite pres. breed to share remarks followed by supervisor campos >> excuse me. >> supervisor campos >> thank you very much mr. chairman and i want to thank supervisor cohen for this
request for a hearing. i was happy to add my name to this. i don't know-i was expecting to see police chief in the hearing and i'm actually very worried he's not here. i think that any discussion about the change of policies around the use of force in the police department should have the chief of police present to hear what we as a body have to say, but also members of the public to say. so, i don't know what happened and it's disappointing he's not a bit hopefully, he'll be coming. if you look at the department general orders that deal with the use of force, it's 5.01, and 5.02, which specifically deals with the use of firearms. it has been quite some time since these orders, which govern the police department, have been revised.
if i understand it, the last time 5.02 was revised was in 2011. i think that the main general order, 5.01, which deals with the use of force, i think that was crafted back in 1995. i don't know what if any amendments have been made since then. so, i think that the point here is that we have to revisit these policies on an ongoing basis and the fact that we have-it's taken so many years without any amendment or revision and summer specs, summer specs, makes what happened not surprising. you have policies and the policies and practices that are so
outdated and not necessarily reflective of what's happening out there. so, it is important for the police commission to revise these policies. i also one thing i want to note, which is very important to me and which i hope to ask the chief if he comes to the hearing, is that it's not just the policies around the use of force, but also how it police department talks about incidents involving the use of force. i am very bothered by the fact that not just on the area woods case but on every single case using use of force by police, the chief of police has made statements that basically say, in each one of those incidents, what happened is within policy even though those statements are made before there is a complete investigation, before we know all the facts. though, if you look at ilex knee xo, the chief
of police went to a community meeting where he said what they did was justified. when you look at--likewise the chief of police went to a committee meeting and said what they did was justified. he did the same thing with mariel woods. i think it's not enough to change the apostate i think we have to change how the department talks about it and thinks about it and the other thing i would say is that, i believe, a change in policy around the use of force and other changes to the sfpd operations should be required before we augment resources for the police department. one thing that bothers me is that in june of 2015, but a 6-5 vote, this board of supervisors passed a resolution that was
introduced by supervisor scott wiener scene that we need to hire more police officers. the reason those of us who voted against it voted it is because we felt before you go down the path of hiring more police officers you actually need to reform the practices of the opposites you have right now. then, the second point-and i want to make sure that we emphasize this am aware that this hearing but also at the hearing later this afternoon and going forward, there are many communities that are impacted by this issue. in the african-american community is key among them. but i want to say that the voice of other communities of color should not be left out. this is not just an african-american issue. this is an issue that involves the latino community the asian community, so many communities.
every community is impacted by this. i think that it's good that were talking about mr. mariel woods, but i think it's not enough to talk about mr. marriott woods. we need to talk about the other cases that involve other men of color, other people color as well. alex--the example that and also emile lopez, i look forward to this discussion. i hope the chief joins us because i think that-it makes things worse when the chief of police is not here for something like this. thank you. >> certainly that she has been invited and have been notified he would be here pres. breed >> ugly breed because i want to get to the hearing and get a lot of the information out there. more broadly, hear feedback from the members of the public. fixing and repairing the trust between the community and the police department is going to require a lot of work. it's not just
about changing the policies. it's about changing the culture. we do have a lot of work ahead of us. i want to thank supervisor cohen for calling this hearing, calling attention to an issue within the department that we hopefully through policy can address. this past week, last week, supervisor cohen and i introduced a resolution asking for an independent investigation in the shooting death of mariel woods. we get out last week on tuesday. that's one way that we can try and get to the bottom of that particular situation. i also mentioned in my remarks they need to look at the constituting the community police relations board, which existed years ago under the leadership of christopher mohammed, who helped to bring leadership from the police department, leadership from the community together to meet on a regular basis and talk about ways in which we can change
policies, but more portly, improve relationships between the police and the community and it is important that we look into bringing it back at a party began work on trying to not only ring it back but bring it back to policy so that it never goes away in the first case. today's hearing is really important. i think part of our goal is to evaluate how training and procedures can be improved and to prevent escalation and violence as a result of those procedures, but ultimately, we want to put the right policy in place so that this never happens again. so, i appreciate everyone who is here today and i'm looking forward to this discussion. " >> thank you. supervisor tang >> i also want to thank the supervisor for calling this hearing today. i also want to say i apologize after step out for portion of the hearing but will be following up with my colleagues to further discuss
this. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor avalos >> thank you supervisor cohen. thank you for bring this hearing forward and appreciate a work of your office work with the community and police department. i understand and i see there's been a lot of pressure on you to take this leadership and i think you stepped in well to do good work. just, also, the other pressure of having this latest incident be right in your district. i think it's been a significant amount of turmoil that you faced and so i want to thank you for your leadership. i was very troubled by this latest incident and i'm troubled by many of the incidents that happened over the years. supervisor campos talked about alex aiken-who actually worked with
15 years ago when i worked at advocates for children and youth and mr. perez as well. we have incidents that have occurred that have really created a huge gap between what the police department sees is acceptable conduct and what the community sees is acceptable conduct. we talked a lot about community policing and to me, like effective community policing is really founded on the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the community. the community does not feel the police have legitimacy, then we do not have effective ways of doing public safety work in our neighborhoods. that's kind of what we are facing right now as a city. what happen with this incident has really discredited not just the officers in the eyes of the public, but also
the police department at some level. i believe, also, the way that the police tournament has come forward and is not necessarily addressed head on back tween themselves and the community, i think there's efforts but in the eyes of the lot of people it has not shown, has really kept us moving as quickly as i think we really could move. so, i think this hearing is a step in that direction and i think there's efforts that have been made before this hearing can about that are the steps, but clearly, there's a lot of work distance still to go. there's a sense in the community that officers involved in the use of force and even when there is evidence that appears to show that the opposite is to not act within policy, but there are no consequences for these officers. that there's a sense of impunity that people have in the cube when these incidents
happened good that sense of impunity that grades that huge gulf and i think as if were going to talk about how we are going to not just change orders but improve overall law-enforcement in san francisco, that gap has to be narrow. so i hope that we can all commit to doing that and i'll leave it over to supervisor cohen to begin with. >> thank you very much. were going to start with our first presentation. i want to introduce to you a man named arun-. he's at trial attorney under paterno atty. gen. eric holder. he's leading a complex cutting-edge system of reform investigation and compliance monitoring including groovy and policies, data evaluation of internal investigation procedures. that's critical to this particular issue today. with a focus on addressing correctional practices which
include use of force and mental health crisis. as you heard in pres. breed's remarks, she and i joined in our request for an independent investigation. erin joins us with a high recognition from judge kordell was the inspector general in san jose. judge kordell has been partner to my office. arun, as well, has been most reworking most risley with judge kordell on the blue ribbon investigation doing investigation assessment and best practice work of the commission on the santa clara county jail. so, without further ado >> just one statement i do not make before judge kordell speaks. there's been a lot of people who believe that this hearing is going to be discussing phasers. i'm not sure if that's the case or not. i just want to make clear on my position on cases. i am opposed to tasters in the police department categorically and i
see that this hearing is really about alternatives to the use of force, of which phasers are a tool of use of force. so, i really will be disappointed to hear-not that any of the speakers before us right now is going to be talking about that but i'll be disappointed to see what's put forward because that would not be an alternative to use of force but rather another tool under the use of force. >> thank you very much. i agree. before begin to evaluate any other tools we need to look at the policies governing and how these tools. without further ado thank you so much for being with us. the floor is yours >> thank you for having me. all the supervisors and in particular i want to thank supervisor cohen and her staff for reaching out to judge kordell who then referred you all to me. i have a presentation. so if i can get
it up, thank you so much. my name is erin's assert. 11 (from the south bay. i'm a former term with the us justice department. my background a little more soothing idea where i'm coming from. again, i'm just very glad to be here to be able to discuss my experience and how that might be helpful to the committee going forward as the city reflects on the best path forward in terms of police reform. the committees considering important set of what i view as very interrelated topics, racial justice, as additional rights, in particular the right to ugly integrity and be free from the use of force. and disability rights, in particular the right of individuals with disabilities including psychiatric disabilities to live in the community safely and with a service that they need and to avoid unnecessary
incarceration and institutionalization. these are all concerns important to the community to the dignity of individual individual numbers of the community, to their sense of equality and inclusion and safety. a national conversation as everybody knows here happens because of what happens in our neighborhoods. in our communities. mr. woods was a member of this community and i take my limited vote here very seriously and appreciate the opportunity to speak to. the thing the overall goal that i had in mind when i put together this short presentation was, i understand this committee and the city, the goal is to achieve credible proactive conference of and sustainable reform. this includes involving in a very meaningful way community members, stakeholder groups, and of course, taking forming
partnerships between the committee and law enforcement. so, quickly, my background as you can see on the first slide, i recently served as a trial attorney in the justice department civil rights division washington dc. for 5.5 years i was working on systems reform case. i think pattern of practice cases is similar to this committee because arvind calls for pattern of practice calls investigation into the practices here in san francisco police department. i work in the section in civil rights division that conducts those pattern of practices into me mental health systems. while there has been a lot of publicity around that office's
work on law-enforcement practices, and an enormous priority there for the civil rights division has been to evaluate systems and human service systems that serve people with disabilities to ensure they can live in the community and receive the services they need rather than end up in institutions. i worked on a number of those cases. so, i bring to my remarks today a great deal of experience working to achieve change on behalf of individuals with psychiatric disorders, intellectual disabilities, in the corrections context, as well as in the community mental health disability services context. and i've also worked on race discrimination cases from the educational opportunities section of the civil rights division including segregation, harassment,. all this work has involved not
investigation individual incidents, which is the task of fbi and criminal section of civil rights division, but rather with a goal towards systems reform and addressing systemic deficiencies. i worked on statewide cases as well as local cases. in addition to the work with the justice department, i think the point to mention i worked with a number of legal advocacy organs organizations including display rights organizations and criminal justice reform policy groups, and while doj and other jobs i have placed an enormous premium on committee engagement, community involvement, community outreach including large statewide investigation where we fan out across the state to talk with all the relevant stakeholder groups. and law enforcement. so,
i presentation is going to be broken down into a couple, a few pieces. i'm going to do a very quick discussion of-i was asked to present some data that shed some light on this problem that the committee is trying to address, and put into a national context. i'm going to talk about what is reform actually look like a lease from the perspective of a justice department lawyer who worked on systems reform investigations and compliance monitoring. i'm going to talk about some of the policies that are being addressed here, but i was notified of this last week. it's very hard to find all the policies quickly. frankly that's an issue probably. some going to mention some concerns some initial observations about the policies of interest but i want to talk about some of the things that the supervisors alluded to witches what we have to do the on looking at
policies and friday, as a starting point, why only 5.01 and 5.02. anderson with a focus on something. we have limited time and this is a process, but those aussies have an impact on other policies and various other practices need to be put in place were need to be looked at to see if they're already in place. i'm going to talk about the solutions, but poorly, there's been a lot of discussion about what is the best process, the best path towards that reform. is it a dig investigation? technical assistance? is it something else? where does the community role come into play in any of those various avenues? i want to just about some of those options which am sure are familiar to many people here. just some quick data regarding a couple of the issues that are being addressed today. in terms
of the disability rights focus, and police encounters with individuals with mental on this, national statistics show individuals with mental illness are 4.5 times more likely than the general public to be arrested by law enforcement. this is the mother statistic to many. agile publishing consists of 15-25% of inmates have serious mental illness that's compared to 4-5% of serious mental illness and that in the general public. there was a report that showed in many jurisdictions have osha shot by the police have mental illness. then, another data point, there's been a number of doj pattern of practice investigations of one person agencies specifically focusing on use of force on this population. so san francisco is not alone in having concerns about this issue. the statistics don't necessarily automatically tell us that their systemic deficiencies
underlying that this portion hourly. the doj has found repeatedly that in various large jurisdictions that has been systemic deficiencies underlying those statistics. i think of a question the committees but important is that the casings san francisco and that's an important question? in terms of racial justice and police shootings of african-americans in particular, there's honestly a lot of things about racial profiling in various aspects of policing. but, to save the topic of use of force, federal data has shown black males were between 15-19 were 21 times more likely to be killed by police than white males that same age group in the years 2010-2012. although blackmun make up 6% of the us population account for 40% of the unarmed man shot by police in this most recent year 2015. i've got to say where is
putting together these statistics i was shocked by how are these numbers were. >> job numbers for latinos or other groups >> >> i did look for numbers for latinos but there readily available because their track as well. i'm sorry i do not bring that information. so, what does reform actually look like and when we say reform we mean something that's compacted and sustainable. pres. breed alluded to this important concept of maintaining the reform, not just being reactive and creating the form in the short term. i want to give a short disclaimer, which i alluded to before, but not san francisco policies in-depth. it something i enjoy doing. that's the job i'm doing with judge kordell in santa carries jail
and would've done as a professional at doj. as provide was also the materials. i understand the concerns by some of the recent incidents. i viewed the video. i've read the news. but i want to be clear that i'm speaking hypothetically. i'm not talking about there has been a pattern of practice. some of the policies that are not seen may in fact exist but i wasn't provided and wasn't able to find them in the short time i had to prepare. i just want to be clear about that did not passing judgment one way or the other. so, i'm going to talk about policies but then i'm going to talk about-i'm going to include in the discussion about policies about policies. 5.01 and 5.02 are substantive policies about use of force. but there are other policies on how we revise our policies on
how we look to see if the policies are being implemented correctly and enforce. in many places you'll see policies on the use of force within the use of force policy, you'll have language about revising the policy. updating the policy. and about ensuring that policy has been properly implemented. that doesn't seem to be the approach here. it's not the only approach but it does make for somewhat more fragmented approach. i'm also going to talk about with those of limitation pieces are. we all know about data. we know about internal investigations, drink and those are the kinds of things i'm going to talk about. and then quality assurance. and oversight. this been a lot of discussion about oversight. i will touch on that. then, not on the sly, but which it pervaded throughout this discussion is this question about culture and leadership.
it comes about not just as a result of revisions to policies and procedures, but through community engagement as everybody here knows. so, in terms of the policies substantive policies, i know there's discussion and commitment to putting the crisis intervention practices into policy. that's been noted lately. so, of course, one of the first things i saw was that in the use of force policy there's no discussion of de-escalation or crisis intervention and beyond that there's no discussion-i think is important-i'll talk more about this later-but try to keep it short-but it should be just crisis intervention training. it speak crisis intervention teams. proactive prevention outreach to the community, outreach to the homeless populace and that of
psychiatric disabilities. this is a concept that should be for mother to us. it's totally consistent with community policing concerts. for thing, is not addressed in 21st century policing the task force report on 21st century policing. i'll explain why that is a little bit later. >> are you referring to pres. obama's 21st century >> i'm sorry. yes, i am. but obama's passports on part of 21st century policing which was an important undertaking involves my colleagues and clearly has other imprint in the material. it's quite compressive but it is focus on policing and one thing all talk about is why we should just be focusing on policing. so, there's a number of issues around diversion and crisis intervention that are missing.
i cite a couple of the relevant orders that could not to get into a lot of detail here. although i can so they discuss it later. i can see a marty going longer than i wanted. really, crisis intervention, the best practices are on forming partnerships with community mental health providers, advocates, much as to provide training and knowledge of resources but to actually deploy together and make it team effort to deal with people having mental health crisis in the community or risk of encountering a law-enforcement as a result of their disability. there are also policies-i know the focus here is use of force-but there's a policy on buys policing and that needs to be revealed. i don't have to say a whole lot about it but something i want to mention is only having relevance to this discussion because buys policing takes
place in all sorts of forms including news of force. which may not be addressed in a particular policy. then, as i mentioned, there should be policies on implementation and oversight. thus some of those policy. i'm going to go through with those different implementation pieces look like oulu to those policy. alluded to those policies. so, i'm just looking at my time. >> chair avalos says you can take them out of time that you need. >> were going to ask questions after. >> terrific. will be here through tomorrow them. just kidding. i'll make it as quick as i can. in addition to policies, the next visa reform is looking at are those policies implemented. training
is honestly huge way to ensure officers know how to implement the written policies and there should be training on all sorts of things including the things i've listed here, use of force, de-escalation, diversion, biased policing, avoiding bias policing and pre-sexual counters and the general order i found there. and procedures. what i mean by procedures, forms, cop processes to whether that's connecting somebody to a mental health service or documenting a use of force or what have you. it sort of the paper implementation of the policies. then, the big topic is oversight. how do we make sure that implementation is actually happening? this whole bunch of ways to make sure that happens.
i like to think-a lot of people like to think-there's oversight or quality assurance as having 3-4 components. data collection . data verification. data review. and response to that review, or quality improvement measures, corrective action. so it's a feedback loop. you reviewed was going on. you make the changes and new review again and you do this periodically. in various forms. you do through quantitative data, qualitative assessments, civilian input, oversight input, community input. so, i artie mention there should be -for example in the use of force policy that should be guidance on how to conduct an investigation. some of that is in their but you see policies that have much more robust much
more digital thing was about how to conduct investigations. there should also be reviews where it's not for disciplinary action. it's not for criminal and particularly in the mental health context which i figure out we upstream how did this individual get to that moment reason countering the police. that means that review includes community mental health. it includes the jail. the probation at other agencies who may yet have involvement with that individual. so, then verification of data. this is what i like to refer to as review of the review. i think this is almost the most important thing. your investigator is going to look at the officer who engages in whatever conduct has happened. how do we make sure that investigation is complete, thorough, accurate, fair, look
at all the things that it needs to look at, interviewed everybody, was timely, was respectful,? there needs to be-and there are mechanisms already in place-to make sure those reviews are reviewed. so that, if an incident report comes back as not an excessive use of force not a data point that may or may not be active. we want to make sure it's accurate and the individual is held accountable as necessary. we can't rely on the first level investigation. there are also times when civilian oversight agencies other entities will conduct a second investigation of the same incident. that may have its place, but more porn than that second duplicate investigation is again an investigation of the investigation. also,
similarly there should be whether this documentation of de-escalation efforts a couple of the bulletins that this there, 14.11 and 15.501 view the officers of quality and completeness. but it's not terribly detailed and there's some, for example, superior officers only notified if the supervisor believes there's possible misconduct. well, this. officers should have a role in deciding whether there's possible misconduct. that may be the case but the policy is ambiguous in that respect. when investigations are reviewed, it is not necessarily. the investigations are reviewed for the quality of the investigation. that's different from the officers incident reports which are reviewed for quality according to policy. there is also
policies on the firearm discharge review board, where there's review of investigations of use of firearms, but those policies don't address the review investigation regarding the quality inadequacy of those investigations and also, i would note here, san francisco should examine the independence of that review process. i would have to spend more time to learn about how independent that is. as i said, there should be a review of the data to see what about trends, bout spikes, certain kinds of the funds, in underreporting. if reporting of this type of incident has dropped starkly, that should raise some red flags. and then lastly quality proven. how do you respond to that data? do update policies? what training? again, the policies i see policies that say
this policy is going to be reviewed annually and updated if necessary. that's one way to go about quality improvement based on data and other information. so, the supervisors noted the use of force policy has not been updated since 1995. there are bulletins that attempt to updated but this new technology, new research, new data systems and the policy ought to reflect those. i think the policy refers to logging incident but not putting it into an electronic database. so, how do we get there? i want to talk about the need for multi-system review. i want to talk quickly about some considerations and priorities that we should have in mind when we decide what kind of approach we want to take, and then the various options. with its doj or some other approach. i thought about multi-system
reform and by that i mean bringing together not only police departments but also committee mental health systems and other relevant agencies. i mentioned this work did doj does onto a mental health systems. we refer to work as olmsted after 1999 supreme court case but the americans with disabilities act with a hell that unnecessary institutionalization of this potus is a form of dissemination under the ada. the settlement agreements, which are on the doj's website, have a litany of these different services, mobile crisis teams, crisis services, act supportive housing, and the usual fare of quality assurance and data collection investigations, etc. so, without looking more upstream, you're
left with the police having to be the first responders were the only responders in a crisis situation in terms of mental health. doj actually has made the link repeatedly although they don't conduct the police olmsted investigation or olmsted prison investigation. i think they should but they don't. in a number of their findings letters admit that link explicit. we said were investigating this police moment, portland police department. that sort of where they left it unfortunate. in the case i worked on wednesday what case involving use of solitary confinement in pennsylvania's prisons, we also had a note in the letter about the fact that addressing this
issue over incarceration of individuals with mental on this requires looking at not only jill practices but law enforcement and community mental health. you can also bring in juvenile justice and probation and the schools. there is a note in the san francisco reports about 21st century policing, i believe, about mou or memorandums of understanding various schools about data online force and moment with students on campus. i've not seen the mou. sounds like they could be reviewed and enhanced. as we go forward, and think about the right approach, here's just some of the not compressive list-of considerations. a dag pattern practice investigation is looking for example at legal apartments not best practices
or policies were committee values of those subtly inform the remedies and those are robust settlement agreements much more robust than you would get from other legal organizations. the law is therefore not assume. best practices among policies, that's what you guys do. it goes well beyond the law. there needs to be consideration to give into whether a legal investigation gets you to that place. and these of various avenues address the multisystem reform approach i mentioned in terms of bringing committee mental health? how transparent, how community oriented, how much do these different avenues involve community engagement including, as one consideration, the diversity of the team involved in addressing the reform? is dear g teams
doj teams show up on the site and your joy with a command color is not always a team that reflects the population are trying to address the concerns of. i then must respect for my former colleagues but we all have our limitations. ownership versus accountability. we want to own the process. but we also want to be held accountable. then, how long will these processes take? the practice they all take a long time and we need to be patient and delivered it. and cost, of course. just very quickly all mentioned, the albuquerque settlement agreement $1 million a year to pay the court monitor at the portland settlement agreement $3 million a year to pay the staff for-but always come with some kind of cost. i
like the settlement agreements a lot out of doj and is a really good process. it's just there are other resources and i want to go through those quickly. i was asked to comment briefly on the need for independent investigations incident as opposed to the pattern practice investigation. it's an easy one. the newsman independent investigation. whether it's the fbi or another entity. i know that's already happening that's being requested. i don't a lot to say about that. under the comment section and civil rights division takes those kinds of cases extremely seriously. sometimes they find they need to prosecute it and sometimes they don't and i trust those decisions. that's one person's perspective. in all these different avenues to achieve reform, there's going to be an
assessment or view. this 20 recommendations on policies and procedures. this can be making sure implementation happens and monitoring for some for lack of time to make sure it sustained. so, the special litigation section pattern and practice investigation, is one avenue that there are limitations, as i mentioned addresses constitutional minimum constitutional requirements. there is a cost. there's the multisystem concern. there's a lot of outreach to the community and fair amount of transparency they can disclose everything they're doing, of course. then of course of huge benefit this accountability. the court is go force them to do it. doj, court monitor but still collaborative. my expenses still very collaborative with the police department were with the agency being investigated. you can see all the settlement agreements and findings of letter are on
doj's website very easy to find and very interesting to look at. but there's not-you don't get any extra abs routines the dear g investigation that you would get from hiring consultants because those consultants that you are the same people that do the court monitoring an expert consulting for doj. there's the cops collaborative reform which i know the mayor has addressed in this incident. they provide technical assistance. some the same limitations in terms of a multi-system approach. committee outreach is probably not as robust as civil rights division investigation. it's not nearly as extensive and then there are grants for example the justice and mental collaboration program grant, which it looks like the sheriff's department's arty involved with good so, there may be opportunities therefore bringing committee mental health together. there's other grants. as i mentioned, there's independent consultants.
devotion to the monitoring. the organizations that are familiar to a lot of people here cna and the rest all those acronyms. i'm happy to provide some of those names. i did want to make a pitch for local resources, too, because this is the bay area. it is california. we have some outstanding expertise from academia. other former doj attorneys and court monitors. judge kordell is obviously an enormous resource. community mental health agencies but some experts on pretrial diversion that are national experts in the bay area. you have more control over the process if you bring in your own consultants rather than these outside agencies, but you get to make sure this committee engagement. you've got to make sure that it's a diverse team. that's addressing the multisystem
issues, and the last thing i want to say, no matter what course to take i said this over and over again-that's to be the involvement of advocates, the committee, families, affected individuals. thus to be attention paid to disability groups, racial justice groups, him and immigrant rights groups. one thing that i found over and over again during this worker doj was more than anything else, adhesives and request that any of the individuals made it was always want to see at the table. i want to be involved in the process because they can trust with the subset of outcomes are. i would go to say to individuals, the fed's arty. were going to get amazing relief. if you could wish for anything what would you wish for? they came up with i want to see a seat at the table but half the time that the vast four. there should be a plan for that too many hours. she organized, thoughtful. it should be meaningful outreach.
and not just the service to involve the community. i don't think anyone here would engage in just lip service about community involvement. so, with that, i went way over my time and appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. i want to again thank the committee. i want to thank the community for bringing these issues before being here for having holding everyone accountable. this a good audience. i certainly hope to be involved in some capacity i'm back in the bay area for the last year. working on issue. i said our commission in oakland on disability rights. involved in santa clara tony with a blue ribbon commission. i want to be involved in my community and i consider san francisco to be my community. these are issues for the committee to adjust. racial issues, civil rights, as this is not rocket signs. this
policy. implementation. review. quality improvement. there are different approaches and different considerations. there's a lot of available resources locally and nationally . i look forward to hearing from this committee about next steps and being available to provide any additional information. if you have questions am happy good >> i think what we'll do is take questions afterwards. so don't lose all our presenters. >> thank you so much >> next speaker is going to be mr. glenda jackson a set of director of the bar association of san francisco as well as president of the criminal justice task force of san francisco. we've also joining here in the presentation is julie truong. so julie truong is also of the bar association of san francisco and cochair of the data committee of the criminal justice passports of san francisco. enqueue
>> good morning. the morning to our city we. thank you for having this hearing and for inviting us to speak. when we got the call from supervisor cohen's office we rest to talk about some of the work that were doing to his committal justice passports which was formed in february or march of last year. it came on the heels of all the killing of young african-american men happening around the country. when we brainstormed with the focus of the midi should be, we wanted to do work that is unique to lawyers. we know there's a lot of groups come together to put thought around how policing should change and how different parts of the justice system should change to become more fair, but we want to take the opportunity to utilize the skills that lawyers are trained with and license to do to bring solutions to this issue. the task force is made up of federal and state judges and we
can give you a list of everybody makes of the task force if you like good high-level attorneys in the district attorneys office. high-level attorneys in the public defender's office. top rank officials in the police department at sheriff's office. the president of the police commission. the executive director of the office of citizens complaints. various private defense attorneys and law school deans. the host of other bar associated members were just interested in the topic. it's been amazing to watch all these leaders who are often on the opposite sides of the aisle was on issues and the koran come together to come up with real solutions to these problems. even in the short nine months the group has been together there had been a lot of success stories. one, being we got behind the grand jury bill those put forth by holly matilda went to sacramento, and
we were able to get that bill passed that led to a grand jury the da not be able to convene a grand jury when there is a police shooting involves the man that now has to be vetted in the public to figure out whether or not charges can be brought against an officer in those instances. then, we very actively engaged around the issue body camera particles. we had one of our members sit on the working group that was formed by the mayor. we made a written proposal on what we thought those protocols should look like. and got two of the three things that we were proposing happen in terms of those protocols. we are committed to staying engaged in terms of data storage and other issues that are to come back down the pipe. another uses protocol looks like when a meet and confer phase in those issues are just implementation protocols are being worked out.
the other subcommittees we have other than the grand jury and the body cameras are data and analysis groups which is becoming very active now for all the reasons my predecessors just spoke to. in that committee and julie will talk more about that-but that committee has met in death with top officials from the police apartment in the office of citizen complaint with the san jose police on an open police apartment and they were very candid meetings with very robust information a change on how those two offices and apartments i should say, have made huge changes in how they police and how they work with their officers to be more community leasing bodies. we also have a pious committee to just look at these behavior
issues that go into policing. and we know that is going to be the biggest challenge because changing people's behaviors and mindsets beginning to organize spices and not act on dioceses is a huge huge undertaking. both had meetings with the police chief on this and i know he's done some training this year with kimberly-around that but it's is sustaining sustained training model. it's not train once i hope they remember everything because we talked about changing human behavior. in the final group is the civilian oversight. so, if we can pick some of the issues happening day-to-day on the streets of the police officers, when things do go wrong, what is the process look like in terms of people filing a complaint, being her, getting feedback and feeling they were treated fairly in raising their complaint. again the executive director one of her top staff are on the task force and working very closely with us on that. for next year, we are
going to probably-were considering we have not made a final decision-adding a use of force committee to start looking at issues around use of force and better policing and issues like mental health nurse citizens that gets stopped by the police and then we are also, which is not much about the policing issue but tangential, looking at the veil and pretrial detention and lack of fairness there in san francisco. so doesn't deal with police moment but get charged deal with how people are charge of pickup and the how the rights are restricted on how bail is set. some going to introduce to you now julie truong was the cochairman of the data analysis and corrections committee of the group and she'll talk to you again about some of what she's learned melodically from oakland. that done amazing things in a short period of
time. was important they had to do it under order, but they got it done. i think san francisco can learn a lot from that. >> good morning. so i'm the chairman of the data collection committee and went to previous speaker, we initially took some of our direction from judge kordell. we met with her and she advised us that what we really needed to do, more than anything was to collect data data data. without data collection accurate data collection is no basis for analysis. so that's where we started. we start by reading all of the material that has been circulated nationally, the 21st century policing report, the president's report. one document, which we received recently which i know we sent to supervisor cohen's office, if you've not read it, i think you should. to be-engineering training on police use of force published by the police executive
>> let me interrupt you. do you have copies for >> i don't but i can forward it all electronically to you. if you would like it. i'm not going to rely on him just mention it. >> colleagues, i'll make sure you get copies of it. >> it's a very interesting article regarding the use of force and the cultural change that is needed in all police departments about the nation as we transition from what we call , opened cause, the warrior to the guardian form of policing. at any rate, we started by researching what was available and then we started with meeting with various police departments. judge kordell open-door for us in san jose. we met with their assistant chief as well as technology people, and on my committee is a commander from the san francisco police apartment
donnie chaplin, who's obviously involved and very committed to doing this work. also a staff attorney was with joyce's office, with the opposite citizens complaints, and member of the aclu and judge laurel beeler and ed linda the committee activist and i think well known to all of you. so, we started with san jose. we met for many hours with san jose. they share with us some of the changes that they went through and i think both for san jose and for oakland, the commonality in that there was some outside force, some outside interest that cause changes to occur. honestly for open it was at a consent decree. which is expensive. i think for san jose was judge kordell. they start with rewriting all the general orders all of their general orders are current, up-to-date and searchable on the san jose website. then they started with
the data collection. they traded and brought officers to the table and work with them on how could they in a very quick way, gather information for every single stop weather was a pedestrian stop or traffic stop in 90 seconds or less. so they would have a way of collecting all of the data on race, reason for the stop, location, whether the was search or anything retrieved from the search, all of that. they were in the process of just solidifying their rp's with technology organizations that were going to assist them with that. after that, we went to open. we've now to beatings with open. i think our meetings with oakland have been amazing. even meeting with assistant chief paul figaro , the chief outlaw and their technology assistant sgt. and
their technology assistant sgt. this is what we've learned from open. oakland. i should start by saying before we met with oakland met with chief workshop guzik consent decree officer in charge of oakland. so, oakland is an interesting police department. i mean, most of us whenever well the riders for me to stand here today and tell you that this department is a department is a great model tells you how far that department has come and i'm here to tell you that i think cultural change within department is very difficult. it has to-it takes a tremendous amount of work. i hope to share with you later, they've just released their 2016 strategic plan. that plan talks about their mission to create a
culture of self-examination. in policing. that is an enormous shift from a warrior kind of mentality that was created when we as policymakers made it our business to start a war on crime i'm a war on drugs, and i think a lot of policing, please training, some of what you see today, is a carryover from those times. so, shifting from the warrior to the guardian, the partnerships with the community. this requires a cultural change. what oakland shared with us is the importance and san jose said exactly the same thing. you have to partner with professionals. oakland has been the lucky to partner with jennifer eberhardt from stanford
who has assisted them from the beginning in the development, not only of the data collection, but most important, the data analysis. the most most exciting thing we learned, and paul figaro took us into his office, where he showed us what is just about to be started. he had a dashboard with a can now take not only all of the data from the stops they had made over a number of years, but also thousands and thousands of hours of body camera footage emma because, recall, oakland has been using body cameras longer than anybody. that is all fit into a database they can analyze it instantaneously. for example, he showed us taken the name of one officer, he could, over time, see how many stops that officer had made, what was the race involved, the reason, was the research anything recovered from that search. type into a software program is all the current and recent research on implicit
bias and exquisite by so markers can be looked at. what is about to be released in april of this year by stanford and dr. eberhardt is a study where they are hopefully creating an algorithm which can take all of this data, including all the body camera footage, and from that they can see and hear body language and words used, not unlike those customer service calls that you make where they say this is going to be recorded. that too is a software program that recognizes certain kinds of language that then triggers a supervisor to come into the call and listen. so the same kind of thing cannot be used so that you can go through thousands of hours of body camera footage in a matter of moments to look for ways in which this officer might b need
more training. or this squad could if this squad is making too many stops and nothing is being recovered in terms of the searches, that needs to be looked at. so, what is important in terms of oakland and san jose, they both say you've got to get someone like jennifer everhart involved in this process to assist you with the analysis. outside analysis will assist you with your transparency and your accountability within a police department so they can help you with that analysis and you go back to training. they are also using with bias screening intervals of training. it's tied to risk management. there's no point in collecting the data weren't using the body camera footage, unless it can be tied to all of these other things like risk management and training. if you look at
this-this is again, referencing this report, we spend 50 hours nationally training a police officer in the use of firearms. we spent eight hours on de-escalation. so, i think a shift in that. oakland is talking about in their shooting range training they are not just training to see how accurate your shooting his, they want to measure how many situations you can encounter without ever using your gun. what is your ability to negotiate? what is your ability to de-escalate? what is your ability to solve the problem without the use of force? so, we are in the middle of our work. we are not yet ready to issue a report. we only that a second meeting with oakland last week. so this is new information. i did send to supervisor cohen a short article
written by paul figaro on these three levels of analysis of body camera footage, which i think you can share with everyone. that would be helpful and as soon as i get the okay from them that we can share the strategic plan with you. i think that would be something you'd be interested in seeing. but this is not a small job. this is a big job. i think that if you're looking for quick fixes, those are grammy band-aid approaches. i think were very lucky that we have opened just across the bay. they're more than willing to help us. certainly, our commander is part of our committee, has been completely and totally open to hearing everything that they have to say and know please bring it back to our department. so, must have questions, we expect we will have our subcommittee probably reach some conclusions within the next month or two and then we have to go to our board and then you can have our recommendations.
>> thank you for being with us today and for your presentation. i hope you'll stick around a little bit. we'll have questions at him. next to her record to hear from ms. joyce hicks, director for the office of citizen complaints. >> good afternoon. what good morning. supervisor don joyce hicks, director of the office of citizens complaints. i'm going to drop was my prepared rocks because so much of what i wanted to say has already been said. by mr.'s isler, by ms. truong, i did provide you all with statistics from the office of citizen complaints on use of force applications, the percentage of use of force, allegations we receive on an
annual basis in the number of allegations that we sustain. a large number of our findings are not sustained. our standard for preponderance of evidence, but we believe with body camera footage and also with video camera footage that we are received we are able to make more definitive findings in the future, but what i would like to focus on policy recommendations that the office of citizen complaints has made throughout the years. also, without stealing the thunder from the police department, who's also in attendance at the police executive research forum meeting, today meeting last week, to say that i was a civilian oversight practitioner
in the room. however, there was an attorney from the department of justice there, christina lopez, who i know from my city of oakland days, as well as ron davis, who is the director of -and many important recommendations are going to be coming out of that today meeting which was preceded by another meeting from which that first report came. we will be a final meeting on january 29, only police chiefs are invited to that meeting and out of that meeting will come a national model on use of force. but what i will say, the highlight of the first meeting was the message to officers about sanctity of
life. and how it's not enough in line is to say to officers, be safe out there. but also, to preserve the sanctity of life. to look at de-escalation models , to look at, as ms. truong spoke about, the guardian as opposed to warrior. while still ensuring the safety of officers. to look at the-to throw out the 21 foot rule about weapons. to look at a different model. a model that would look at tactical repositioning a euphemism for retreating instead of charging in. of using shields as a part of the process, of using weapons other than a weapon of
deadly force. if necessary. but what i took away from that meeting was something from the retired commissioner of the philadelphia police department. he said, in these situations, the most important tool and officer has are the officers years and the officers mouth. also, what was really telling at that today hearing was hearing from the united kingdom from scotland, most officers do not carry weapons but they're dealing with individuals who have-i should say most officers do not carry firearms. they're dealing with individuals who have machetes were nice. and have a tactically reposition, how they create teams. or how they tried to de-escalate. so,
without more,-i know the captain he was at the meeting we will talk more about. san francisco's plan i will talk about the policy recommendations of the opposite of city complaints made over the years. in addition to being an investigative agency our agency also makes policy recommendations to the police department to enhance the police department's relationship with the community while still ensuring officer safety and then i just want to show you all the police use of force in new york city, a recent report that came out of their office of inspector general. which is different than their civilian oversight investigative agency, ccr be. it was written by philip-fairly new inspector general and he
makes many recommendations on use of force. so i think this would be an important tool to consider as well. but in going over that 2012 policy recommendation, regarding use of force, one of the recommendations we made was in his review of officer involved shootings by requiring the police academies training division to provide a written training analysis of each officer involved shooting that includes for review-included for review by the firearms discharge review board. >> i'm sorry you have a copy you can share with us of the recommendations? >> i do not unfortunately, supervisors. just because of the passive time i was not able to provide that. these are recommendations in our annual report but i'll make sure that the supervisors received it. >> thank you. >> could you repeat the first
one, please? >> yes i will. and i'll read it were slow. to enhance the review of officer involved shooting by requiring the police academies training division to provide a written training analysis of each officer involved shooting. that is included for review i've got firearms discharge review board. >> the firearms discharge review board is that internal to the policewoman? >> that is the police robin board that determines whether discharge of a weapon is in or out of policy. it can range all the way from a discharge without hitting anything up to and officer involved shooting that results in a fatality. but board is comprised of command and staff from the police department, as well as to
civilian representatives who do not have a speedo. i'm one of the civilian representatives and a member of the police commission is the other civilian representative. a second recommendations we made is requiring the department training division to develop a training video and written material to address tactical responses to mental health crisis calls involving individuals with a bladed weapon. the third use of force recommendation we made in 2012 was developed written officer involved shooting procedures for the department these on to the family of the individual shots. and also to the community. >> these are recommendations?
>> these are recommendations and the police department can address have it implemented >> can you tell us have any these recommendations been implemented? >> in part, not in whole. >>, you recommendations are you going to read off to estimate? >> i'm butchering off maybe five more. to enhance the procedure for obtaining the assistance of a bilingual officer or other interpreter of officer involved shootings and other critical incidents. in 2013, we made six recommendations on use of force and officer involved shooting. the first gen. order 3.10, to include the officer in charge
of the department training division as an advisory member of the firearms discharge review board. now, while some of our recommendations have been addressed through department bulletins, department bulletins are not permanent. they only exist for two years west department gen. orders are permanent. second, department gen. order 3.10 to include finding categories including training failure, policy failure, supervision failure, tactical debrief administrative disapproval. number three, require a sergeant or officer of higher rank to respond to any call involving an armed suspect. what i learned at the meeting was that when a supervisor arrives at a critical incident be shooting are reduced by 80%.
if the supervisor is there to de-escalate. develop a protocol with the department of emergency management so that dispatchers merely notify a sergeant or officer of higher rank and the dispatcher receives a call regarding an armed suspect. i should say armed subject. for, developed with the questions that dispatchers will ask to determine whether the call involves an individual with a mental illness and obtain key information about the individuals mental illness. number five, revise the general order 6.14, 8.02, 8.01 to establish written protocols for the permits crisis intervention team. number six, implement department 2011 obligation to
design a data collection system to review and evaluate mental health crisis calls in the promise response to such incidents. i just also want to briefly refer this committee to the office of citizen complaints third quarter report where we provided responses to president obama's task force on 21st-century policing. we concluded that with regard to data collection, that the department that should have a more about data collection program, that use of force
incidents are posted on its website. that it be available monthly. and that forms be developed, electronic forms be developed to implement this should currently be occ receives the use of force report but their hand written. that the-secondly, that the department we examine policy training and evaluation of force incident in light of the california supreme court decision hayes versus san diego. where the court ruled under california law, but tactical conduct and decisions preceding in officer's use of deadly force a relevant considerations in determining whether the use of force was reasonable. and that in all
cases involving the use of deadly force sfpd baldly tactical conduct and decisions preceding in officers use of deadly force. in the analysis be included in the evaluation of the incident. we suggest that sfpd use its devices use of force policy and training to include consideration of tactical conduct and decisions preceding in officer's use of deadly force. a final recommendation that we made was that the department meet quarter. the policewoman meet quarterly with my office to identify training policy and procedural recommendations arising from disciplinary cases. that, and brief concludes my remarks. >> do also the recommendation
that the police department approve your recommendations? >> well our accommodations go to police commission. the police commission ultimately determines what the police department policy will be. it is the police commission that adopt the draft general orders and then they go through a meet and concern prosecutor so, i note supervisor, that was tongue-in-cheek but in a roundabout way, i've seen it, we have been making these recommendations for several years. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. so, i think were going to come to a close on the presentation. thank you for your time to the
presenters, but that, today. i think it's evident and very clear tool that we have a lot of work to do. the good news is, we've got a wealth of information and tools right ear at our disposal. i here in the bay area. all he has to do is begin to ask for help and this is clearly not something we can solve ourselves in a vacuum and without the community input or communication. this also includes other law-enforcement agencies. that local talent rate here we need to be utilizing. you have many times dr. jennifer everhart, frank-as laws as well as you'll wind up jackson and her task force. the blue ribbon commission to up us solve some of the challenges we have here. there's a national movement and police reform and san francisco we seem to be
uncharacteristically behind the ball in some areas. so, what you heard from the presenters here today is a framework for evaluation under existing policy. then you heard a presentation about best practices, the need to partner with thought leaders that are doing the work that reporting the data and analyzing the data , and how we need to begin to push our sfpd for different internal cultural change, a change from where we are to a place where we are creating cultural of self-examination. i think the strong put it nicely when she said that these change from a warrior mentality to a guardian mentality. i think that would also speak to a lot of the community feedback i've heard. now, to finish the presentation we've heard from joyce hicks, the director of office of citizen complaints and she gave us some very tangible list of policy recommendations that we can
continue to push to see implemented. ms. truong also referenced this is going to be a tough uphill battle to make this. to make these changes come to fruition, so i look forward to getting a copy these policy recommendations and sharing with my colleagues here, but also the same bedroom and putting the pressure on the police commissioner so they begin to implement this change. now, i just invite i think we have a representative from the sfpd. i didn't realize that-the chief was scheduled to be here and he's not here. please come and with a four to your presentation. then i'll finish -once you conclude our your presentation i'll finish my remarks and then we'll have questions for the presenters. thank you. >> good morning. thank you for seeming my name is greg pettit of the training division for the san francisco police
department. and i'm here to provide a report on some the changes we've made in the leased apartment recently and moving toward some of the recommendations and how we plan to implement and improve upon those recommendations >> thank you, capt. >> at the direction of the police of of chief the san francisco policewoman has convened a panel committee to review policy. the committee will research discuss proposed changes to 5.01 and 5.02. as director hicks mention we do have a bulletins that expire after two years, but traditionally renew those bulletins such as shooting at vehicles, responding to a call from people in crisis,-so the intent is to revise general orders to bring them up to speed and up to date from 1995. the committee is meeting today as we speak along with the training committee which also review best practices from
internally and externally from the region and the nation on training requirements and training philosophy that are in the best interest of the department and the community. immediately chief has made some quick changes in our vista qualifications. we are now all her pistol qualifications required one hour of training for the officers were they go over policy procedure and de-escalation. traditionally, it was just you go and fire a firearm for marksmanship and manipulation of the firearm but no were adding the components of policy review and de-escalation. as for the pistol qualifications, they know all those targets would turn this into. they're alternating targets were officers up to see the threat on their own, see the situation
on their own and then act accordingly. this was while targets turning at the same time and all officers firing at the same time. the obligation course has been modified so that edge stage of fire there no more than two shots fired per stage, where there's time for officers to assess and reassess the situation before firing an additional round. so, those things i meant to slowdown the situation for officers to take the time to assess the situation and evaluate the appropriate use of force. if needed. not all situations will require active firearms obligation to fire their farms enabled we will stir their farms if the situation resents is always a non-shooting situation with the change from the past where every turn of the target require the officer to fire.
supervisors and other members and other speakers imagine it's going to take time to change the culture of the police department in part that change is building trust with the community. in generate 1210 numbers of our department went to local-went to oakland to take their procedural justice and implicit bias course. it was an eight hour course. the department intends the plan is then to take those 10 trainers and train all members of the san francisco police department in the procedures of justice and implicit bias so that officers understand the community has to have a voice. there needs to be neutrality. the need to the trust and respect in order for our department to better serve the community the chief-and myself are going to participate in the state california department of justice principal policing course, which is the statewide procedural justice course and
the 20th trainer to train of course in march of this year will send additional trainers to that course to learn from mac was what we can bring back to san francisco to tailor principal policing and procedural justice for san francisco. in february, the department is going to host a conflict resolution course. it's hosted by the new york peace institute and it's a four-day course where the officers will develop range of new skills to peacefully de-escalate conflict and constructively engage the public. this is in addition to the cic training which is 40 hours for every single recruit that these the academy. the academy cause i graduated last is currently in their last -second to last day of cip training which includes the
mental health. and lieut. molina can speak further on that if you like. back in october of 2015 we made some changes in our training at the san francisco police academy. it was called a non-safety healed tactics course were officers were meant to [inaudible] but we added a de-escalation component to that , which was a non-shoot scenario. where officers were faced with a person encountered a person with a edged weapon and the gold that was de-escalation, back out of the situation, maintain and assess the situation to negotiate a peaceful resolution to that encounter. which we mixed in to
a course that was primarily the firearms tactics course. so, we switch it up on their grades so that they have to understand that use of force is fluid. it's dynamic. it can escalate and de-escalate and they have to respond appropriately and as we learned in washington and from the uk, after respond proportional. with the use of force proportionate to the situation that presented itself to the officers? in addition to firearms training de-escalation, the department has also invested or reinvesting into the officer. the officer have the capacity to deal with situations? how do they manage stress? how do they make decisions under pressure. through blue perch, inclusive leadership we are reinvesting into the officers to not only work on their tactical training but also their critical decision-making ability under stress. to see
how they handle and how they can build the courage at times to intervene when things are not going right. that is a shift in culture of having officers take the stand, another shall officer on the shoulder and say, step back. but we assess this and let's move forward. some of policy guidelines from-as director hicks mention is the sanctity of life. in the united kingdom the sanctity of life is the focal, the middle of the wheel of the national decision-making model. anything that revolves around the decision to use force revolves around the sanctity of life. that all life is important. all life matters. we need to ask our officers, winners onto the scenes, do i need to take someone's life?
the last thing we want to hear from the public is, i asked you to help my son or my daughter not to take his life. those are questions the officers have to ask themselves. they have the ability. they can use force, but should they use force. those are the things were instilling into the recruits and is officers come back for the biennial training, how do we develop them to remind them that there's more to the use of force. what are the community's expectations? must go beyond policy advocate what the community expects. if that was your mom is that if that was your dad, that was your relative on the other end, how would you want them treated? how to want the situation resolved? so, those are questions we ask recruits that every decision they make their responsible for. with that
spots ability, they will be accountable for that. even if there at the scene and they don't take action, though still be accountable for not intervening on situations that require intervention. i slain to them that we sitting at the front row of in the blue seeds and when that splash comes the prepared to get splashed and what i'm good ask you what did you know, when did you know about it and what did you do about it? these are hard things for others to wrap their mind around, but it's a shift. it's a shifting culture that were instilling at the san francisco police academy. the take away from from-use of force continuum. the continuum implies it's a rolling-it's moving forward like an escalator. it's not a continual and we try not to use that word continuum. because each forces dynamic. it's fluid. only to escalate and de-escalate. what changed in the situation after striking a person with a baton?
which had the officer increase the level of force? cannot officer explained that? should that officer increase force in that situation had not changed? these are scenarios that we build for the recruits. these are discussions we have with them. to affix and professionalism we want to provide the best public service to the city and there's no nothing else we can do to provide the best. when we review our policies, i mentioned proportional use of force. our policies reference reasonable. in the uk they reference proportional. was a force proportional to the threat or the situation? the words we choose our policies make a difference on how the officers read and interpret it. the big importance, the big thing is slowing things down and that she has made things clear to the officers and my
training staff is that, time, distance, cover and report. so it things down to assess the situation to make sure the decisions be made by the right decisions not only for the department both of the community. we take that very seriously. that although there is the 21 foot wool, which is mentioned in the report, we mentioned that in the academy as an awareness. it's not a line in the sand where someone steps within 21 feet we have the right to use force. it's an awareness. it's a tactic put on a video from the late 80s. unfortunate, it's out there. on youtube and where else but we tell the recruits that it's an awareness. it's not able. a rule. scenario-based training israel. it's the best training the officers can get and whether recommendations bi-. even though there's many recommendations in the perth
study, we always improve. that's how i view it here we can always make things better. we can improve upon everything we do and everything we learn from. the role of the supervisor on management and personnel management having a supervisor on scene makes a significant difference, especially in the apartment. officers need direction to tell them what they're going to do. and when they should do it, who should be doing what. who should be protecting the scene. those are all things we expect of our sergeants. we also expect this from the officers to maintain that scene prior to the supervisor ryan arriving on scene. another tactic is de-escalation and communication. the negotiations, questions versus commands. when officers arrived to the scene the first question with a first command should not be, talked the night. one of the question should be why you have a knife. what is your name?
what can i do to help you? we don't want to hurt you. so, changing the training from commands to questions, especially when you're engaging someone with a mental health crisis, many times the protecting themselves with a knife because they're fearful of someone attacking them. not the police, but for protecting themselves. so when officers asked the question what you have a knife in they see because i'm protecting myself because of whatever is going on in the mind, that gives the officer perspective, okay, that person is not here to hurt me. there's something else going on. so those are changes that were going to. in our realistic scenario-based training is asked questions. the last thing is the critical national decision-making model that they use in the uk. we do most of
that already were we gather information to assess the situation and assess the risk and assess the front. what policies him a what tools do we have. what we need to emphasize is sanctity of life in that decision-making model. should that life had been taken? what else could we have done? how else have we can be escalated the situation to resolve this window force has to be used and that everybody gets to go home and the person in crisis, the person who is the focus of our attention gets the help that they need. that is a shift where we focus on the sanctity of life. so, the holistic approach the policy, training, and development of the officers so that they have the heart and mind to do the right thing going back to value-based policing. we don't need 500
pages of something to tell person was the right thing to do and that's the message we tell the recruits. we know you know the right thing to do. you don't need books to tell you the right thing to do because human nature and ethics in your moral compass will tell you what the right thing to do is. thank you very much >> thank you. we'll have to move this a little bit along. lieut. melia what you have to add? >> [inaudible] >> we will hear from the community. >> [inaudible] >> you have an opportunity. in a two-minute interval. the molina would you be brief i appreciate it. >> on the officer in charge of behavioral otto. also accorded her for the office otto. a brief history of it, we have a program modeled after the -program the police commission
[inaudible] we have been implementing training everson. we trained about 300 new officers as of today. as of tomorrow night would've had 39 more officers. that's a class that graduated last friday. would have 342 officers on the streets of san francisco that have received the training. the training is very comprehensive. [inaudible]. to talk about the neighborhood culture and officers about fences between the police department and the community. so, we have a conference of program. we have a community-based program. we have people from-with experts
in the brain. the first day is devoted to how the brain works. developing. we talked about diagnoses. we talked about behavior. this is very important to address the behavior of the person. i don't expect our officers to go in diagnoses the bonuses, but i expect them to recognize behavior attached to a persons. so that's the first day. the second day we concentrate on the juvenile brain development. various trauma. this again areas . how about a fact that young person as he becomes an adult. [inaudible] please officers can take under consideration when doing with that person. we also have scenarios. specific to
that type of behavior. we do a suicide prevention. a two-hour block. that's conducted by san francisco suicide prevention organization. it talks about how to identify key triggers in a person that's thinking about suicide. we have speakers from-coming members [inaudible] we also solve. panel speakers that speak about issues with the police department. [inaudible]. provided to the training to the officers but i think the most important thing they can take away from the cfd is it community-based. i attended the first meeting in washington dc and what i washington dc and what itook abouwith that san francisco is unique about how is carried up your we have a working group.
we be san francisco we have occ. we have an array of services and advocates and consumers that take part of that. so, it's not just one person's decision. it's not the police department's decision. but what's being taught to our officers but in fact, it's a community model., true believer ought not. in order for a program to work we have to be done by the community and police department. so, we have classes coming up as the captain said before, where training our recruits. right now we have a class going on. we emphasize the training to be a way [inaudible] and the reason behind because i don't want my officers to be distracted by radio cars, by silences or anything going on.
so i want to take them away from the police environment and put them in a quiet place and learn about mental wellness. i think what we have is to coach it. you have the law-enforcement culture and you have the mental illness culture and we have to marry the two cultures so we can work together. when we talk about law enforcement, we told officers to show command presently we train officers to be commanders. predominate, put down the weapon. if that person, for whatever reason does not respond to that, we are allowed to escalate the use of force. verbal persuasion, physical constraint and so forth. it doesn't have to [inaudible]. we have to assess every time. when you talk about , if the officer does not get a response, from a particular person, he will assume the
person is not complying with this office so the use of force is escalated. when you talk about the mental health culture, it's a little bit different. we're trained to go up there, assess the environment. what is causing this person to act this way date because one of the triggers that causing the person to do what they're doing? and address the environment. historically, it shows police officers will get involved in shootings with the first minute they arrive >> we need to please wrap up. >> just a few more minutes. >> please, hurry >> so the idea that window of opportunity. i want my officers to slow down, create distance, and that will give them time. so that's the message i have. we are doing-i was glad to hear
the attorney was talkative and things that the department is recommending. we are doing that. last week, i was able to meet with the director of the department of justice about how we can assist us in getting money. thank you so much >> thank you very much. in the essence of time, i want to recognize supervisors become post is that some compost. supervisor campos. >> i'm still not sure why that she does not here and i appreciate the captain and the tenant resenting but i think this kind of discussion really acquires the head of the department to engage with the elected body and the community. you know, i have a question for the chief and since he is not here we have the ranking
captain. there's a lot of talk coming out of the police department and i have to ask you this question because i really feel that nothing will happen in terms of changing the relationship between community and this police department unless you actually address and handle some of these incidents properly. for all the talk about training, one of the things-what i found the most disturbing about the mariel woods case is the fact that the police officers are still on the payroll of the police department and so, you talk about the sanctity of life. how does it it advanced the sanctity of life that these officers are still on the payroll of san francisco pd after what happened and the
videos that we saw? >>[applause] >> i don't know if you could give me a response but that's what i want to ask the chief. i'm sorry >> i understand your question. i understand where you're coming from but i can't answer that question as the decision >> that's the problem. you have is the analogy of a ship going down and you have captain of the ship rearranging the furniture. you're not doing anything to address the underlying problem. with the training on mental health, i mean, even if you take what you're saying at face value, 342 officers, that means 80% of the officers in the department are not getting that training. eight out of the 10 officers interacting with folks out there on not getting that training. there's a lot of
issues here. i just wanted to ask a question because i think that how we handle the case of these officers sends a message and i think the message right now is to is a horrible message that actually negates all the positive things that you're saying and doing. so long as these officers are getting paid i think that you've got to continue to have a problem and i think it is wrong could i would ask, not only the chief to reconsider, but i would ask the mayor, since he is the chief executive of the city to step in and say, i know the police commission doesn't have control over that. i know they couldn't wait in on that but the mayor and the chief should not be okay with these officers being on the payroll right now. >>[applause] >> i will add, i'm also concerned that there has been a
part or not an official position of sfpd but the police officers association going around in the way they talk about this case,, it almost looks like the police of him and doesn't want to take the kind of action that supervisor campos wants to take because they're afraid of the poa. these are all nice words about recommendations that they want to do, but until the community has a sense that there are consequences for the use of force, even the use of force that maybe can be justified, unless there are consequences, there's going to be huge sense of impunity that officers face. >> i understand. as these issues are being discussed it doesn't sway me from continuing the pursuit pursuit under my sphere of influence with trying
to build the trust with the community through the recruits and provide them with a solid foundation can i understand your concerns. however, at the same time i'm in my swimming lane and try and do the best i can to get the best police officers for the city that they deserve. >> i think the one that concerns me about the policewoman it seems his reaction. people in crying out and been hurt and killed for years to past. it's only now, this one incident that the police department has shown any kind of consideration to make any kind of changes. to me, this seems very retroactive it doesn't seem very genuine or reveal all or a desire to begin to implement these changes. the mayor's office is a thing, late to the party as well in incrementing changes, ordering
what are those things called, shields. we need to be on the proactive side not reacting. we need to be doing more. we been asking for community the african report to be a moment that for years. it's incredibly fresh mint which are seen on the news on streets certain level of frustration at people when asking for this for a long time and now you're just coming to the table. why be quick because increased pressure. because there is a video. because there's mounting documentation and that was frustrating that people have just reached their level their breaking point, and that is the expression of your scene that are stopping traffic, that are protesting and just same timeout. enough is enough. present breed has a few remarks. i think will give her a chance to speak >> actually, yes. i really want to get to public comment. i know there's a lot of information that has been provided and i'd like to echo the comments of supervisor breed. i think what were
experiencing here is, sadly, growing up in my neighborhood, police brutality was it happened way too often. with a new agent technology and video, all of a sudden, other folks outside of these communities are seen what's happening and we can't continue with business as usual. we have to make changes and we have to be proactive about those changes and we can put our guard up and say, well this is training. this is how it's done. this is what were trying to do change it. we just have to do. we have to figure out a better way. the promise weight may not be the best way to do. because, i think from my perspective, as someone who is isaac grew up in this community i feel there's a real cultural disconnect because often i'm, i think sometimes you look at, or the department looks at may be specifically the african-american community, and especially if you grew up in an african-american community with his poverty, weathers despair, weathers frustration, sometimes
the communication and how someone is communicating or how someone feels is not about being violence were attacking the police. sometimes it something you mentioned in your comment. sometimes it's about their own frustration. we don't have the luxury to have officers who work at the department who are scared of our communities who don't understand our communities, were not going to know who the people are in our community to figure out how they can best serve that community. just the video and seen like, how it happens in the situation, it just was heartbreaking to me because i felt that apartment should know better and they should've had a better response, but instead it was a response that just was not something i think the department-it's not a way i feel that apartment should be responding to a situation like
that. it's really frustrating and i think that's what were experienced. all the stuff now, we have video. we have all the stuff that is put out there and it just bringing to light, sadly, something i've seen far too long in my community. i want to make sure that we are going to make some changes and make some significant changes. so, with that thank you supervisor cohen i'd love to hear some comments from the public >> will go to public comments. thank you, capt. [calling names]. please come up to the podium. remember, your 2 min. you'll hear a soft chime indicating 30 seconds time remain. >> thank you, supervise. thank you supervisor cohen for calling this hearing. a lot of good information and yes it was
all implemented it really might make a difference. the idea of being on the scene for 2 min. before you shoot somebody, what a concept. maybe even not shoot them. it could happen. we've got to make these changes. 30 odd people killed in san francisco by police. that's too many people, too many of our brothers and sisters are being killed, too many children are being killed. so, training the recruits is one thing but there's got to be some massive changes among the regular force. i know you have the goal, obviously the oversight committee has that goal but it has not happened. how are we going to make it happen now? thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you for holding this hearing. john avalos spoke at
the justice four-this program la has the calls crisis intervention people not police officers to come first. we need to have that. also, with we want have a sanctity of life. for one month the police officers disarm when they're out on patrol and only call in weapons, backup, when they need it. england did use arms for a long time. also, in any lopez's gaze in sonoma county the 13-year-old killed carrying a gun, the judges will today that she saw no threat to those officer. that content on a 13-year-old kid with a toy gun. also, we need best for the ptsd test good rehabilitation. and if there's been rebutted that become part of the force not before. they need to earn the name peace officer. we need compassion, metrodome this is
not being treated like it did in the past they can say we were defending ourselves and other videos are stopping that policy. 4/5 police commissioner told us that were training crisis intervention. that killed marielle. how could that be? wasn't any discoloration attempt did we want to know who fired the first shot speak of was that the rookie that was not trained? we need to know this information. parents are calling the police and the children are being called. i'm a mother and grandmother. thank you so much for caring and they do so much for really getting into this this i feel like were finally, finally getting somewhere in making police officers not cops and killers. >> thank you. [calling names] >> good afternoon, supervise. thank you for holding this hearing. it's with great sense of sadness and also the sense of shame that i've come to realize
the sfpd is a very typical police department. like baltimore, like los angeles, but chicago, is a devastating occupying army in communities of color. i'm cautiously, very cautiously optimistic, however the sfpd can and may even will change and lead the way. by cameras, the software to analyze implicit and explicit bias, the new training of its officers when they need it, all that is great stuff. i'm very pleased to see two of the police commissioners here if they have a policy overview. but the warrior culture at sfpd is very apparent. especially, with the poa and also important with chief. last night that warrior culture was on stark display. the martin howard had
organized a police show of force at the commission hearing last night that i attended. they explicitly called out melia cohen for her remarks about a diverse firing squad could after several poc's, please officers of color spoke to the just the viability of the marielle woods hearing, they walked out. on the way out, he said to his cops, good show of force gentlemen. that's how we win. so, the most important thing is going to be the political will behind the effort to change the sfpd culture. so, i'm hoping cautiously optimistic that you folks are going to get the political will, that the commission is going to get the political will and that maybe even the mayor will get the political will. >> thank you for your comments. [calling names].
>> i want to thank the supervisors that came to our coalition meeting. it was good. thank you, carolyn, for coming and videotaping us. it's important. when i watch the video the following morning, i was felt such raise. i'm just a hip stopped jumping away from the police department. what stopped me was i know these cops are too crazy. they are psychopaths. the biggest problem is that you can train
cops if have a low iq of 105 and below. that's a fact. you can do your homework online. because if you get a higher iq, they won't hire you. and officer did sue the city and one won. so, things need to change in the city big-time. no, i don't know which officer had that gun pointed at mariusz had . that first shot him in the back of the head. then a pause. then, 20+-shot in the side of his body. note that had happened in any other way, if you've been shot in the body, then all those gunshots his
body would have been other all over the place. but no those body shots were right beside his body. he's laying dead on the ground. bang. bang. bang. he's laying there already dead. >> thank you. we've got a lot of speakers, sir. thank you. [calling names] >> thank you for holding this hearing. i would really advise everybody to check out the hayward burns reports that shows that san francisco is among the worst in california for the racism in the criminal
justice process, at every step. arrest, bookings, convictions, and sentencing. it's a very important thing to look at. we are living in a society where the insecurity of trying to exist is driving huge numbers of people crazy. it's driving him to suicide. it's driving them to drug addiction. it's not surprising that were finding all these people going crazy on the san francisco streets. critical intervention, training, is not going to bank a bit of difference. actually be actual teams that go out there and they shouldn't-they don't have to be and should not
be cops. psych tax work all the time with people in a lot of trouble. they are not arms. so that needs to be done. teasers cannot be instituted on this. it isn't an alternative to bounce. it is another kind of violence. it's been proven that, they're not to be used in situations, in dangerous situations, so it's not going to reduce officer involved shootings. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, supra my name is patricia gray. i'm a member of a family of san francisco
police and my father was a policeman. to my brothers were policemen. to nephews. my husband was a policeman but things have changed. in all the years they served, not one of those men ever took their guns out of their holster. i think there is been terrible changes in our police department over the years. i think a major failure is with the hiring. i think people are tired to be police officers have certain standard of intelligence and also a sense of some compassion and empathy. we don't need people that want for some and make you do something. we can't have testing so we do not-and especially i heard preferential hiring for these often illegal wars all over the world. those poor people have been traumatized 24-7. they need to be certain they're not
suffering from post to maddock stress which could cause a person to just see it several threat and shoot to kill. kill. kill. the second thing is about training. certainly there needs to be more training on the step back, time back. not shoot to kill. i understand that our sheriff's apartment is being trained with some of the israeli defense forces and i fear the police might be also. we need compassionate police officers. >> thank you. [calling names] >> my name is adam's chains, resident just moved to san francisco from the city of arcata near eureka with it some of the problems, which is not new with having lots of police
violence. they went to to police chiefs a lot of political turmoil and still not solve the problem. i think one of the comments supervisor cohen made use of force is not a new issue. i believe that's true and the question is, why is that. why is it not new issue? there's lots of answers but a lot of people have spoken to culture. that seems to be it's a buzzword. it's not clear what that always means, but i'll explain what i believe. i think culture is something people learn at an early age and people recognize it's very difficult thing to change culture and the type of training and other things. the culture is fairly interlink. in my opinion, i think one of the issues that's a simple solution took off again problem is that the recruiting of the police emphasizes military people, veterans. not people who have learned and taught that force protection and using a gun is
the primary solution to lots of situations. i think that the incentive giving a preference, i think it's unfortunate veterans may be good for lots of jobs and they're good people, but i think policing is not something that is really suitable for most veterans because of their culture. i think that culture can change but it's very difficult. to start with people who don't have what i-i'm an engineer-weave in a special thing if you have a hammer the world looks like a nail. if your culture has taught you that guns are a way of solving issues, you're going to see is a natural good thing to do. i think the trainer in the police mama said we know you know the right thing to do. it's a statement of culture and that is wrong i think. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> thank you very much
supervisor cohen and all the supervisors. it's a breath of fresh air to come to this hearing and here leaders who are compassionate about the sanctity of life. last night was kind of questionable. to see 70 law-enforcement officers desecrate the sanctity of life and possibly interrupt the healing process for the family was quite devastating for me. i also wanted to emphasize that it took a lot of strength and expertise to get professional panels here today. i was quite overwhelmed with the intricacy of all the information and will take years for some us to digest, but my caution is, that we don't bury that humanity in algorithms and in analysis of
data. that we take seriously what-i've been sick i like to quote from his most recent book. it's so easy with people who are preserving society to view the disruption of the blackbody as incidental to the preservation of order. we can't be a city like that and today i am refreshed to hear the ways were moving forward in a compassion. >> of >> be speaker next speaker, please. >> i'm a fourth-generation-resin. the ever-present black san francisco. i want to first say that oakland police department
is not a reference to sfpd. oakland police department just murdered an unarmed black man in november. so, they're not a reference for sfpd, as was even an example today by one of the presenters. i believe the occ. also, there's no reason that an unarmed man should be murdered in cold blood in front of children and none of the children at the academy who witness this young man being murdered have given a crisis intervention team to help them process what they saw that day and that needs to be addressed by the city. these were 11-12-year-olds who made witness mr. mario woods murder. and officers unloaded their clips. there's no reason to unload their clips. there needs to be a conversation about what officers will is and they are there to protect and serve the community, and they are not the jury. they are not the judge,
and if they believe mr. mario woods to bleed a threat to himself because of his mental on this, that something for a paramedic to respond to. my uncle is a paramedic for 30 years and he response to 51-50 cases all the time. so we need to reevaluate what officers will is in the community. also we need to address racial bias and who is going to all these officers accountable for their unjust actions if it's not the supervisors, if it's not the mayor and the chief could be holding officers accountable good i know the community is organized will these officers accountable but we also need to support elected officials to help these officers accountable and get them fired. >> thank you for your comments. [calling names] >> hello. i'm represented of
the [inaudible]. i'm speaking to the supervisors because these particular people at least have an interest and seem like they have a heart. first of all, independent investigation. that's already been done. we've all seen the video and people all over the world have responded to it. so that cases settle. i been doing this since 1996 audley from aaron williams killing two mark garcia up to the present. all this has been as a talkshow. procedures, procedures, procedures of handling mentally ill people. procedures on how to better show respect for the people. what does that mean? excuse to make sir, may i assure you? this is a national epidemic. that's what the videos over the country have
shown. this open government is going to come to our aid. when it's coming is for people like you to stand up and say, look, chief, you have presided over dozens of killings by your offices. you are also a murderer. the cops to kill our murders. the nuremberg tr established that. you cannot say i was just following orders. look, any five of you could've handled the situation with eastern maurya was better than those five cops did. that's the point. we need fundamentally a revolution, but what we need right now in order to get their his mass protests in the street join with people in baltimore and chicago and new york and same forget the procedures. you can deal with the procedures but lee's murder of black and brown and our people must and and we are going to end it. >> thank you very much for your comments. [calling names]
>> my name is kurt wechsler and him with the [inaudible] organization. we can't wait to see an end to this murder. i just have a pretty simple observation that people have alluded to, but i don't think has been properly addressed. it actually should have been more dominant subject for this meeting today. that is that just people are talking about changing processes and policy, and frankly, let's get real. if people are not held accountable any change in policy is really irrelevant and that was missing it. we all know what happened.
we all saw five murders commit murder and what we should be looking at is how we bring officers accountability. that's what we failed. that's where the legal system failed because without accountability it's all pointless. >> thank you very much. >> jim jennifer freida mock i'm also member of the mental working group of the san francisco police department. often, in the aftermath of tragedy, committees seek fundamental change to prevent the tragedy from recurring. we have in san francisco, right now to do the tremendous power for sponsoring the community to the woods killing a real
opportunity to complete transform the way force is used by these san francisco police department. we need to close that goal golf between what's acceptable in it of use by officers and was acceptable by community standards. a big area big part of the solution is the use of de-escalation techniques and in 2012 the police commission passed a resolution in the mentee and the bases intervention team. today, we been making some progress but has not-it is not-been implement it. the training is partially implement it. it's not the 20 hours for all officers. it's important but very little time is spent on teaching and practicing de-escalation techniques. the resolution also calls for a supervisor who is trained to be on the scene them attached response overview of the incident when force takes place
with mental professionals incorporate the findings into the training. none of that has taken place. we also need a strong review with data effectiveness of cit. finally making some progress but most poorly is a general orders have to drink. he was given to police officers in complete contradiction in terms of what the training is using de-escalation. much of what we learn from cit be applicable to the rest of the department, but we have to make some serious change and we have a lot of work to make those. >> thank you. [calling names]. >> good afternoon, supervise. my name is sean [inaudible]. spokesperson for the maurya with them here a couple things i want to say to the supervisors, thank you so much
for showing leadership on this. i do want to say something mentioned earlier how these officers are back at work and getting paid. it's very disrespectful to the family. first and foremost. because my woods is no longer here. and there get back at work getting paid. i want to the commission last night was very disturbed from the simple fact the poa is still being very disrespectful and they marched in with 70-80 officers and him are so like a game. and that been in any situation across the city of young black men want marching like that were young gunmen marching like that they be admittedly been told talked about in the papers is being in the game. was very disrespectful. they looked and smiled as if we don't care about how you feel. that's one reason i knew that was one of the issues they were going to do. i come from the western
addition. with supervisor breed. i got in that area where it was hard to live. they just finally now has been caught on tape. they been doing this for years. they just now have got caught on tape through cell phones and cameras. it is a disrespectful thing for officers to feel it's okay when the young man is walking. if you clearly look at the video he's walking like, leave me alone. let me go. when you open fire and should this young man down it goes back to the mom was in. shooting black young men down like animals. in closing i want to say this. you mentioned about the police- >> thank you very much. it was
like to speak please come up at this time. you are welcome. >> thank you for calling this hearing. i'm here this morning representing justice for mr. mauer was coalition and i want to be clear that our intentions for a hearing is not to allow the san francisco please apartment to be given cover for them to think that they can just to continue to say that a just policy is a problem. as you noted very well and some people i spoke to, for the last 10-15 years is been plenty of reports and documentation could've come from outside studies as well as internal studies from the city but we been saying for years nothing coming out here since 1994, the will of san francisco is not there. so one gentleman just said we've got accountability and be able to trust you start
by firing the chief. this body can pressure the mayor. there's plenty of things that can be done to make sure the mayor understands that until that demand is met it's going to be continual problems and reaching a tipping point that normally we celebrate, it's all in jeopardy because this city has not had the will. remember, the san francisco police commission is a part of our charter. we have a right as san franciscans, that they implant policies that affect the will of the people. but people do not want to police department that comes into meeting late last night, 70 deep, look at people crazy, calling people out. one of the officers i grew up with. call me out by name. this is the stuff we have to
deal with in this work by the richardson was just saying. we have to deal with intimidation, threats, subtleties, being followed around. they're giving tickets when you're trying to fight for justice for your community. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is albert watson. i like to make a couple of suggestions. one, i've noticed the publications and online postings of white's premise groups the members of their followers to join police departments and other forces to
gain weapons and have the authority to kill black people and other people of color. i suggest that before you give weapons or uniforms to prospective officers that you early that them to find out who they are and where they come from and what their purpose is. also, we go through the same process with officers that you already have on the police department. you don't know who they are. they may come from anywhere. i also suggest that along with the training of the officers you been trained in the use of martial arts. i suggest aikido. it teaches how to protect themselves and victims were the people there arrested. it's a second way of dealing with situation where the other person is not arms. i took a limited course and it served my leg. julie people coming with me at with an eye.
don't feel fear because you love choreography that you can perform to save yourself. if officers knew how to save themselves they would not panic. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> supervisors, i'd like to introduce into the permanent record on the borough documents that spell out the hundreds of murders that happened with teasers. a lethal instrument of torture. mayor ed lee has called for the introduction of teasers as a solution. introduction of teasers represents an escalation, the opposite of all of the methods we've been talking about to solve problems to de-escalate,
to use the police in their proper legal role as peace officers, not war officers. so, i call on this body to introduce a resolution opposing teasers in the san francisco police department. i understand you cannot legally force that to happen, but it may be as much as you can do legally. ms. never have teasers must have a moratorium on teasers. this is become before the police commission i believe i'm a four times in 10 years. i testified against it in 2013. that's a terrible waste of time. it doesn't do anything but promote murder and risk of death and injury. these are very dangerous . thank you.
>> hi. my name is lynn-my high school history teacher. and i'm also storing of the lack freedom struggle. i'm with the justice for mary was good. >> sorry mr. chairman we've lost corm of the committee at the moment. >> let's take a quick break until supervisor campos >> i want to atco something supervisors avalos and campos said. i first want to say i really have great respect for police officers who do their work well. i'm always proud of
my students when they become police officers, but there's incredibly widespread fear and distrust of san francisco police officers right now. in the black and brown communities. so, to echo what the supervisor said, it's wonderful to see these day escalation tactics this discussion moving forward, but the ration you have right now in the present moment, the ways been dealt with right now is congenitally to exacerbate the fear and the feeling you are not on our side. on the side of the community. so i want to suggest , if you actually care if the police in san francisco care about rebuilding trust the black and brown communities, first of all, those communities from what i can see as a youth mentor, someone in the community they do not trust the
chief. he does not-in fact he does not have a record of emphasizing de-escalation. if you care about black about committees i think the best place to start in building that trust would be by replacing the chief with someone who has a proven track record of building strong communities and strong connections with black and brown communities is a proven track record of artie emphasizing de-escalation tactics. if that doesn't happen i'm not sure if trust is going to be easily rebuilt. that's my suggestion. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> i appreciate you being here. i was shot in the back one time it happened just before otto got chuck. i was rather scared it won't be able to
speak that day about the dirty politics that took place. i guess they never got to speak. those dirty politics, the color blue has turned darker than black and it used to be a light blue. we had to fight for that. with ms. coney and milk, we lost a lot. what we have here today was given to us by our lord. that's technology. with a badge camera are lost, matt rainey, he's our man. because he speeds for the body camera and he speeds for our lord. he's a muslim, i hear. the things that we hear about ross
being a wife beater, never. well she might've had an angry moment but was not enough to press charges. so, when they pointed that sheriff, the appointed her from a position that was appointed to her by our mayor. in our mayor lied under oath when he said, it wasn't politically motivated. he lied under oath. then there was a bomb scare. >> we want to keep the comments about- >> that's what i'm speaking about. the complacency that we have here, about what we do and how we do it, posttraumatic shock >> thank you. are there any
other members of the public would like to comment? >> are you going to speak? were about to close public comment >> i think there are several situations you might want to consider. what if a person doesn't understand what officers are saying? if their death, don't speak the language. they do not address that. so, they think they're resisting and they don't know what the officers are saying. but you can also consider a vote of confidence. they say you can't fire the police, but a vote of confidence would be important. i also want you to consider what can this body and what can the police do within the next month or six months on
most like to meet the changing policy.. for me, it would be to put the shields, the riot gear in the police cars that something like this happens they can go get their shields and stop them. the have some protection. the other thing is the police officers bill of rights. i think you should do something to just you don't have all of those rights to hide your misconduct if you come and work in the city and county of san francisco. in a sense, in addition to that i would also say you would consider the-decision that pretty much says police misconduct is somehow hitting. hitting. >> thank you very much. if there are no other members of
the public would like to comment book close public comment. public comment is closed. you can only speak once. he already spoke once. the closing public comments. >>[gavel] >> supervisor campos >> i want to note a couple points that i think are important as we move forward. i would think the bar association for the presentation. i think the work they're doing is important. and i think that i don't know exactly when their recognition will come out but i think it's very useful tool. it is isn't always said that oakland which has its own share of challenges is ahead of san francisco in some ways. for one thing, eventually managed to have a gaudy camera program implement it and were still waiting for ours. it's been a long time. on the issue of best
practices what policies we should follow, i also want to be very cautious about this reliance on-. they are a body that a group of experts but made up of police officers and chiefs of police, and that's important part of the equation. they have one perspective. every member of their board of directors comes from law enforcement and that's important perspective, but that is not the be-all and end-all in terms of what should be of best practice. then, with the occ, i have a lot of respect for executive director, joyce hicks, but i think their institutional and systemic challenges that the occ has, including the powers it has, but alas the powers, persons to begin its own investigations.
there's a problem with the fact that we've had hundreds of allegations of racial bias is been no allegation sustained.. nothing was anything wrong with those investigations but sort of leads as a member of the public a lot of questions about whether or not if there is racial bias that can actually be fully investigated given the resources perhaps this agency has. on the implicit bias training, i mean, we talked about this for how long. even to this day people recover for just a few members of the leadership of the sfpd. i'll close with this. i am optimistic and i hope that we have the reforms are needed but when it comes to training i'm not convinced this department is where it needs to be an ltv
the example my experience with training. we had, a few years ago my office organized a joint meeting of it please commission and a youth commission. first of a kind. a few years back. out of that meeting came the recognition of one of the things that happen at sfpd is that the specialized training on how to interact with youth. including training that takes into account the physical differences of a youth whose body is not fully developed. we were, at times someone who is an intern who is now a legislative aide, we as a work with the foundation to find money to do that program in san francisco pd, to do the training which at that point, boston was doing it was a national expert that was willing to come and do it for sfpd and we actually found the
foundation to pay for it so that sfpd would not have to spend a dime on it. and the department refused to do it. they refused to do it. years later i can tell you i'm sure very little or nothing has happened on that. you know, the proof is in the pudding. they can come here and talk until they actually do something i think we have to all remain skeptical. >>thank you supervisor campos. i just want to thank numbers of the public for being here. and also want to thank the public for really keeping pressure on the san francisco police department and city hall. we need to create the conditions where change can really happen and that takes a real organizational strength from outside of san francisco because of left the apartment up to its own devices, we wouldn't see things change. so,
as we turn the level of outrage and anger into something that can be useful for holding city hall accountable to creating a police department where there really is trust and accountability. that's what's at stake right now for us. this hearing is one step, one part of a kind relationship we need to form between police officers and their weapons, but also police officers and the community and hopefully we can find the time, a place, a time and a place where you can actually not have to use any force whatsoever good that's a worthy goal. it's not one that is unrealistic by any means. certainly, other countries are able to do this type of policing and we should hold our souls to that as a goal here in san francisco. i want to thank
supervisor cohen for bringing this forward. she has several members of the board of cosponsored this hearing as well. i think it's critical that we continue this effort and work towards building these relationships, and also work to make sure there's pressure on the department to really do the kind of thorough systematic training and changeover that general orders create that all san franciscans deserve and in particular san franciscans of color. if there are no other comments from the committee, we can have a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair. >> cusack >> can we take that without objection? without objection any other items >> that concludes today's meetings business mr. chairman. >> we are adjourned. >>[gavel] behalf of all the gue
the staff at st. anthonys it is great to have your here this morning. [applause] >> here at st. anteanys work with people who are homeless and those on the virj of becomes homeless and what we have sheen more aunch unforch-footly than not is people that feel isolated and excluded so very happy to see when the mayor has something to say about the homeless pop ylgds he comes to the tenderloin and st. ancyanys.
we insisted those we serve the homeless in particular are not the problem, they are brothers and sisters. the problem has to boo with us and the way we structure our liferb jz cities and thijsss like that see great to see when we want to do something about homelessness the mayor is coming forward and making good proposals for how we can solve our problem, not fix the homeless. >> [applause] >> there are a lot of people here working for years on that problem. it is a problem for the whole community but it is also one we need to thitsy to step forward to help us do so we welcome the mayor in his remarks today. without further ado, i would like to recognize a couple people here
that have come and been long involved ing these issue. angela alota is here today. from the san francisco interfaith counsel we have mikem pops and rita chimal. supervisor marc farrell is here. supervisor jewel jewel yechristensen and all the department heads here of the city and all the community based organizations that are represent. thank you for coming and welcome to st. anthony's >> good morning everyone. thank you all for being here. let me
begin with just comment about some things that have occurred in the last 48 hours that i know are on peoples minds and want to address that right off before i get fl to had body of the speech. but i want to start out with some words about the officer involved shooting that occurred yesterday in the bay view and rutted in the death of a man. let me first say that any time, any time, there is a officer involved shooting i take that extremely seriously and so does our chief. i have seen the video too you know, you look at the video and you just-before my words came out, we were yelling drop the dam knife. i already spoken to the chief and there will be a thorough and transparent investigation of this incident without delay
and know the public deserves this and expect it and i expect it as well and will make sure the community knows all the details about this. i also want to take a moment of silence with all of you to remember the victims of the tragic and sensely shootings in san dern bernardino yesterday. our thoughts are with the victims and families and the people of san francisco grieve with them. but you know, you know what they really deserve? those families deserve action. deserve the congress that will stop this madness, stop and by enacting sensible limit ozen deadly fire arms and they need to do that now.
[applause] we cannot just accept this. we cannot just accept this. thank you. thank you. and again, good morning everybody and thank you for being here. first again i want to say thank you to the [inaudible] and barry for hosting us this morningism barry you and the staff for helping the needy and velinable throughout the city is a inspiration to me and it is never tiring to cut turkey with you bury. i also want to say thank you to our elected and appointed officials and community leaders and pleny of the non-profits providers are here this morning, thank you for joinsing us today. i'm very proud for
being reelected your mayor. this is a wonderful city and want to say thank you to the voters of san francisco who believe in our solutions oriented and collaborative approach to solving problems and have asked us to return to do more. thaupg for placing your trust in me for the next 4 years. this is the greatest city in the world and i'm honored and humbleed as the mayor to serve another term. you know, i often said and will continue saying i love the city, i love it as much of any of you and also with you. i love that we never run from the challenges. we confront them with our progressive optimism and something that has come to define our city in all of us. we tackleed a whole lot this last 5 years
and some the most complicated and intractable challenges remain and i ran for a second term so we can work on them together. foremost among the challenges wrun we struggled with for decades is homelessness. let there be more doubt, the collective best effort like service providers like all you in the room today have certainly made a difference. i know that because i have been paying a attention to this for many years. while i may be a little silent sometimes, i watch, i talk to people, i engage and once in a while i might be lucky enough to hand out a key. you are the ones, everyone in the room, you are the ones giving the hor heroic rfts at front line staff on a
midnight shift at the shet ers and do the outreach and are case managers with a challenging loud. or you may be the one cleaning up the streets so people might have a cleaner street to be on because that is the only place they have. the best evidence of all of the work collaboratively is the over 20,000 formally homeless people living indoors. living independently and with the social and emotional support that they need and that the needs that are met with our city services or they might be back in their home towns. but, despite this we haven't eliminated homelessness. as we house and serve thousands, they are replaced by
new thousands. people, people who fall in homelessness here, people sent from other states or people who arrive every day seeking a better life in our city. as a result we continue to have people living on the street, under the freeway, in tents on the sidewalk and some even without tents. all together, more than 3500 people are street homeless in san francisco. human beings. human beings with hopes, with fears, susceptible to cold and rainy weather. human being who deserve or compassion. we know there are nearly the same number of people without homes that are living in our shelter, treatment programs or temporary situations. friends , this
isn't a healthy way to live, you know that and i know that, especially if children are a part of that family. it is not just a growing problem here in san francisco by the way and we all know that as well. major cities across our country, la, new york, honolulu, seattle and more and the state and federal governments offer us too little assistance. that's why next week i'll join at least 5 other mayors on the west coast and our federal government representatives to explore federal funding opportunities and policy changes in the area of homelessness. i know we look at the streets sometimes and the encampments and the depth and complexity the problem jz to some it all might feel hopeless, but as your may frr the next 4 years i'm
optimistic because today in san francisco all of the ingreedgents of success are here to end homeless for thousands of our fellow citizens. thanks to a historically strong economy we do have resources. we certainly have creativity and know we got the passion. for our serviceers providers and city staff, we have the energy that is required. we have public support to try new more effective approaches. but you know what is missing? what is missing is the ingredient lacking for generations, it is what we call, real cooperation. we can't solve street homelessness, but it will if we want to , it will require cooperation.
we have seen this cooperation at the place called, the navigation center at 1950 mission street. when community providers work with city departments, when the private sector in the surrounding community all come together with us, we actually are creating a national model for ending homelessness. so, next year we are going to do something bold that skills up the cooperation and coordination this requires and we see at the navigation center all of that happening across the board on homelessness. i will call apauss all the departments to work together with our community based organizations, advocate and national expert to ert change and reform or
government and other, and will create a department with a mission to end homelessness here in san francisco. [applause] i begin by not just making-i know people have worked on this for years and want to acknowledge first the great work of our past mayors, feinstein and agnos, mayor jordan and willie brown, of course gaveen newsome. i want to build on each of their legacies for addressing homelessness. of course our former supervisor alota talks about passion. she dedicated a life time to the work and want to say thank you for being here and thank you for being a trusted advisor and advocate and one that reminds everybody we got to get to better solutions. i
want to also acknowledge the good work of our former supervisor bevan dufty and director of hope for the last years for tireless work with service providers and client to move people into better lives. i learned a lot with bevan, but i felt his passion avenue day he has been on the job. and today, building on the work that came before we begin a new agency, a agency with a budget and mandate to solve homelessness. we'll bring together under one roof the multitude of homeless outreach, housing, shelter and supportive services that exist across many different departments. over the last 20 years, we increased our spending on homelessness because the crisis got worse. but because we didn't have a central department for
homelessness we layered program upon program across a dozen different department said and then we expected the better outcome. no one agencyies mission was homelessness and today we fix that. with greater coordination we expect better results, more efficiencys and deep er accountability. to make this new department a realty next year i'll be calling upon the leadership of barbarager seea director of public ehealth, trent roar director of human sunchss and [inaudible] director of hope. together we have aurltd r already implemented some the most forward thinking progressive homeless policies in the country. we created the nations first navigation center, which is just 9 months that we have successfully moved more than
250 people off the streets into healthier settings. great progress towards ending chronic veterans homelessness is done these last few years tackling family homelessness we made great progess. a new investment in supportive housing of 29,000,000 this year. i want to saw they think to tren, barbara and sam and all your team said for pourer your hearts in this work and thank you for joins forces with us to take it to the next level vlt i want to say a special thank you to public works. i know that department . you kept our streets and have done your best and for always having a positive interaction with the homeless people and compassion and thank you for taking on the smelliest
dirtgist jobs in town. i also want to say thank you to all of the people who are own single room occupancy hotels in the city thmpt hotels that are cooperating and working with us to make these units available for people transitioning out of homelessness. that is stock of housing. we never thought through our past loousts and insistence to get code enforcement, we didn't realize how valuable they are to us and a valuable assess they can be. i know some people will say, a department to solve homlessness mayor. 93 eve. we can't solve homelessness in san francisco. i know that will will be peoples comments. i say we will end homelessness every every single day for
@ least one person. for at least one family. for at least a veteran every single day. i know because i have felt the power of giving keys to people exactly in those situations. we will end it for every 1 for every day for someone who suffers on our street. that is what the purpose of creating this department is about. i want a staff at this new department, each person on the staff will come to work every morning with a single minded focus on ending homelessness for people on the streets. i want the measure of the work of this department and my office to be answering this question, what did i do to end homelessness on our city streets today and what did i do to give
people a stable shelter, a home and a path to a healthier life. that is what i want them to ask themselves every single day. i want that to be the question that they ask of themselves. you know, ending homelessness in a very simple way is a matter of priorities. to get there we have to double down on programs that truly work. we have to coordinate with partners, federal, state and other cities. we have to share and do the best practices and we have to also share our challenges with each other. and you know, i always am focused and concerned about congress and as you know, congress is largely abandoned homelessness in the country and we in san francisco can't wait frathe politics of waug wash dc to arrive, we have tolead and we
lead with values. our san francisco values. that is what being a san franciscan is all about, isn't it? it is our values. to be fully able to achieve this vision i'm inviting a group of national experts to advise how to create and set the mandate for this new department. i have spoken to president obamas point person on homelessness, matthew dorty and he agreed to come out and advise and has the expertise of looking at programs across the country to see what works. we want to be egressive on this but want to be practical at the same time. how will we define sausking street homelessness? what are the investments we are making and how can we double down on this? is there something that we can be doing that we are not already doing? i aults
want to invite the local homeless coordinating board to serve as a formal advisory body during the process. we convened san franciscos best and brightest on that commission and definitely need your input. i invite all of you here, every one of you, the people working hard every day day in and out to join in defining the new effort as well because i'll present this plan with the budget this coming year. foremost among the efforts of the department are expanding the successful navigation center program. we learned that by removing barrier tooz entry into the shelter program and pairing ever navigation center with a housing exist we are making a difference. we already committed the funding in the budget this year to double our capacity at the navigation center and the department
will significantly increase to this model. we'll coordinate outreach and build more centers and secure more housing exists. certainly this requires serious funding. since i took office we have spent all most 100 mil yen more every year on homeless services and housing and my commitment today is this, to never let our city slip backwards on our funding priorities. that means movering forward we'll spend at threes 250 million a year on outreach and housing for 10s of thousands of people. we know success isn't mesered by how much money we spend, you know that. accountability matters. we are measured by the number of human
beings we lep off our streets and into a better life and by conditions on our streets also improving at the same time. so, i'm setting a ambishish but i believe an achievable goal for the second term. by the time i leave office we will move at least 8 thousand people out of homelessness and we'll remove them out of homelessness forever. [applause] and we'll build a system that ends a persons homelessness before it becomes chronic. that is another thing we learned from the navigation center and we'll do this and achieve this all together. we'll do this by housing families, veterans long term homeless to homeward bound program and long term care for the seriously
mentally ill. i also need cooperation for the private sector and philanthropic partner tooz participate as well. i already started conversation with san francisco's business leaders on this particular goal. business leaders, big and small, about a multi-year partnership to add additional navigation centers to the cities portfolio. to them across the board i say thank you and begin by saying a personal thank you to our first anonymous private donor to the the first navigation center. i'm excited for our partnerships to develop more in the coming months just like the way we started our first navigation center. it was a partnership with faith and funding sources and community in the mission and then everybody else. we need more partnership
models like our effort to end family homelessness in the elementary schools which is the focus of [inaudible] 2 great civic leaders. no less different than our technology leaders like nob nub who also became a partner to end veterans homelessness by funding a viable new housing for them in mission bay. letting people live on our streets exposed to violence and whether that isn't compassion. it isn't healthy, it isn't safe and it does want represent who we are as san francisco and it is not our san francisco values. you know, i'm also proud of our city coming together over something that used to be controversial and i'm talking about lauras law. thank you for visor marc
farrell, thank you for your leadership in this effort on a issue that used to divide a lot of us, now it units us with a comma causs because we are figuring it out. since we launched our consensus program just last month we have already received 28 referals from ern concerned family members and service providers. some of the most severely mentally ill they are finally getting help. laura's law is one the many compassionate programs we should be doing in partnership with our courts and district attorney and justice system. san francisco values means we won't lock people up or persecute them just for being mentally ill. that won't happen and won't happen
as long as i'm mayor, but we can use the resources our justice system to make sure people are getting better heltier outcomes. i want to challenge the courts, our public defender and district attorney and health provider tooz come together in the same spirit of collaboration that i proposed today. coming together with your diverse responsibilities and your legal mandates to better serve those desperately in need of our help because i will challenge you with the same outcome i'm calling upon everyone else. let's talk about not just our legal mandates, lets also talk about outcomes for people. [applause] it is not compassionate and you will agree with me on this to let people suffer silently, to medicate with drugs and call and live an
unhealthy life on our streets, that is not compassion and we are empowered to help the seriously mentally ill people but first have to agree to coperate. in a new year i'll invite all our gurchlt stakeholders and mental health and criminal justice to convene with me. i bring this group together to get past the reasons we cannot do things and figure out a way we can do it. let's say for example, you take this program, some of you in the room know what the 51/50 program is. it is a program with people in personal crisis and danger to themselves we take them to the hospital for 72 hours, but you know what is the challenging part of that 51/50 program? once they come out they go right back on the streets and into the same unhealthy
situation that they were literally 48 hours ago. we pulled them out and bring them right back in. that is 51/50. let's redesignthality program for a better outcome, a sustained outcome for those individuals. let's redesign conservativeship programs to serve the intended populations while respecting their civil liberty. we can have a better outcome on that as well. the seriously mentally ill deserve our best efforts. it is complicated and that's why we take that challenge up. as we focus on getting people into healthier settings, we also need to refocus on the people who are not homeless. the people who prey on our homeless. drug dealers who target the addicted
and mentally ill contributing to serious health problems. i'm calling y i am calling for stepped up enforcement for predatory drug dealing around our navigation centers and shelter and homeless service locations and every place we house our homeless. [applause] we need to clean up drug dealing around the buildings where homeless people are trying to clean up their lives. we are not criminalizing drug addictions, we are enforcing existing laws to protect the most vulnerable. i want to thank supervisor and president of the board of supervisors president london breed for being a leader on the reforms. she is a strong voice the quality of life and reforming our treatment of the mentally ill.
that's why friend i am optimistic. a new department, ambitious goal, a will in our city to succeed on this. we can make homelessness rare. we can make it brief. we can make it a one time event in peoples lives. we can move at least 8 thousand people out of homelessness forever. for too long deeply held and ideological differences divided all of us. some say we are not tough enough. others say we are not compalgzinate enough. some say we spend too much money and others say we haven't spent enough. it is time to reconcile these disagroogruments not to set them aside but work through them. if we can cooperate to solve homelessness the sky is the limit on what else we
can achieve together. i want to say to you again, we can end homelessness for each individual that we touch, for each family, for each child, we can do that for them. that's what we can define as ending homelessness. if we do it together, we will have demonstrated that collaboration and cooperation is the best way to move forward. so, i want to end by saying thank you to all of you for taking time out of your busy day to listen to me. i'm excited to work with you, this will give a struck chur to work effectively with all of us. we can do better and will do better, i'm excited and we are san francisco. thank you very much. [applause]
>> hi, i'm lawrence corn field. welcome to building san francisco. we have a special series, stay safe. we're looking at earthquake issues. and today we're going to be talking with a residential building owner about what residential building owners and tenants can and should do before earthquakes and after earthquakes. ♪ ♪
>> we're here at this wonderful spur exhibit on mission street in san francisco and i have with me today my good friend george. thanks for joining me, george. and george has for a long time owned residential property here in san francisco. and we want to talk about apartment buildings and what the owner's responsibilities might be and what they expect their tenants to do. and let's start by talking a little bit about what owners can do before an earthquake and then maybe after an earthquake. >> well, the first thing, lawrence, would be to get together with your tenants and see if they have earthquake insurance or any renters insurance in place because that's going to be key to protecting them in the event of a quake. >> and renters insurance, there are two kinds of insurance. renters insurance coffers damage to goods and content and so forth. earthquake insurance is a
separate policy you get after you get renters insurance through the california earthquake authority, very inexpensive. and it helps owners and it helps tenants because it gives relocation costs and it pays their rent. this is a huge impact on building owners. >> it's huge, it really is. you know, a lot of owners don't realize that, you know, when there is an earthquake, their money flow is going to stop. how are they going to pay their mortgages, how are they going to pay their other bills, how are they going to live? >> what else can property owners do in residential rental housing before an earthquake? >> well, the first thing you want to do is get your property assessed. find out what the geology is at your site. get an expert in to look at structural and nonstructural losses. the structural losses, a lot of times, aren't going to be that bad if you prepare. an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. get in there and get your property assessed and figure it out. >> so, what is a nonstructural
issue that might cause losses? >> well, you know, pipes, for instance. pipes will whip around during an earthquake. and if they're anchored in more numerous locations, that whipping won't cause a breakage that will cause a flood. >> i've heard water damage is a major, major problem after earthquakes actually. >> it is. that's one of the big things. a lot of things falling over, ceilings collapsing. but all of this can be prevented by an expert coming in and assessing where those problem areas and often the fixes are really, really cheap. >> who do you call when you want to have that kind of assessment or evaluation done? >> the structural engineering community is great. we have the structural engineers association of northern california right here in san francisco. they're a wealth of information and resources. >> what kinds of things might you encourage tenants to do besides simply get tenants renters insurance and
earthquake insurance, what else do you think tenants should do? >> i think it's really important to know if they happen to be in the building where is the safest place for them to go when the shaking starts. if they're out of the building, whats' their continuity plan for connecting with family? they should give their emergency contact information to their resident manager so that the resident manager knows how to get in touch. and have emergency supplies on hand. the tenants should be responsible to have their extra water and flashlights and bandages and know how to use a toilet when there's no sewage and water flows down. and the owners of the building should be proactive in that regard as well. >> so, george, thank you so much for joining us. that was really great. and thanks to spur for hosting us here in this wonderful exhibit. and thank you for joining us (clapping.) the airport it where i know to
mind visions of traffic romance and excitement and gourmet can you limousine we're at san francisco inspirational airport to discover the award-winning concession that conspiracies us around the world. sfo serves are more 40 million travelers a year and a lot of the them are hungry there's many restaurant and nearly all are restaurant and cafe that's right even the airport is a diane designation. so tell me a little bit the food program at sfo and what makes this so special >> well, we have a we have food and beverage program at sfo we trivia important the sustainable organic produce and our
objective to be a nonterminal and bring in the best food of san francisco for our passengers. >> i like this it's is (inaudible) i thank my parents for bringing me here. >> this the definitely better than the la airport one thousand times better than. >> i have a double knees burger with bacon. >> i realize i'm on a diet but i'm hoping this will be good. >> it total is san francisco experience because there's so many people and nationalities in this town to come to the airport especially everyone what have what they wanted. >> are repioneering or is this
a model. >> we're definitely pioneers and in airport commemoration at least nationally if not intvrl we have many folks asking our our process and how we select our great operators. >> ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ the food option in san francisco airport are phenomenal that's if it a lot of the airports >> yeah. >> you don't have the choice. >> some airports are all about food this is not many and this particular airport are amazing especially at the tirnl
indicating and corey is my favorite i come one or two hours before my flight this is the life. >> we definitely try to use as many local grirnts as we can we use the goat cheese and we also use local vendors we use greenly produce they summarize the local soured products and the last one had 97 percent open that. >> wow. >> have you taken up anything unique or odd here. >> i've picked up a few things in napa valley i love checking chocolates there's a lot of types of chocolate and caramel
corn. >> now this is a given right there. >> i'm curious about the customer externals and how people are richmond to this collection of cities you've put together not only of san francisco food in san francisco but food across the bay area. >> this type of market with the local savors the high-end products is great. >> i know people can't believe they're in an airport i really joy people picking up things for their friends and family and wait i don't have to be shopping now we want people take the opportunity at our location. >> how long has this been
operating in san francisco and the late 18 hours it is one of the best places to get it coffee. >> we have intrrnl consumers that know of this original outlet here and come here for the coffee. >> so let's talk sandwiches. >> uh-huh. >> can you tell me how you came about naming our sandwiches from the katrero hills or 27 years i thought okay neighborhood and how do you keep it fresh you can answer that mia anyway you want. >> our broadened is we're going not irving preserves or packaged
goods we take the time to incubate our jogger art if scratch people appreciate our work here. >> so you feel like out of captured the airport atmosphere. >> this is its own the city the airline crews and the bag handlers and the frequent travels travelers and we've established relationships it feels good. >> when i get lunch or come to eat the food i feel like i'm not city. i was kind of under the assumption you want to be done with our gifts you are down one
time not true >> we have a lot of regulars we didn't think we'd find that here at the airport. >> people come in at least one a week for that the food and service and the atmosphere. >> the food is great in san francisco it's a coffee and i took an e calorie home every couple of weeks. >> i'm impressed i might come here on my own without a trip, you know, we have kids we could get a babysitter and have diner at the airport. >> this is a little bit of things for everybody there's plenty of restaurant to grab something and go otherwise in you want to sit you can enjoy the experience of local food.
>> tell me about the future food. >> we're hoping to bring newer concepts out in san francisco and what our passengers want. >> i look forward to see what your cooking up (laughter) ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> today we've shown you the only restaurant in san francisco from the comfortableing old stand but you don't have to be hungry sfo has changed what it is like to eat another an airport check out our oblige at tumbler dating.com
>>[gavel] >> good evening. welcome to the january good evening. welcome to the january 20, 2016 meeting of these san francisco board of appears. the presiding officer this evening is and lazarus and she joined tonight by commissioner frank fong commissioner swig and bobby wilson could expect bobby honda to be here any minute. at the controls is gary-the board legal assistant cynthia goldstein the executive director. russell joined by represents of the city department that of cases before the board this month.